74-462: EEX can refer to EEX Convention, see Brussels Regime European Energy Exchange , the energy exchange in Germany EEx equipment class EEX (calculator key) (enter exponent), to enter numbers in scientific or engineering notation Topics referred to by the same term [REDACTED] This disambiguation page lists articles associated with
148-582: A Decision of Council, reached following the Maastricht Treaty's initial rejection in a 1992 Danish referendum . The purpose of the agreement was to assist in its approval in a second referendum , which it did. The Danish decision to opt-out was subsequently formalized in an amended protocol as part of the Lisbon Treaty . In 2000, the Danish electorate voted against joining the euro in
222-469: A protocol which exempted it, as a matter of EU law, from participating in these policy areas, which are instead conducted on an intergovernmental basis with Denmark. A number of parallel intergovernmental agreements have been concluded between the EU and Denmark to extend to it EU Regulations adopted under the area of freedom, security and justice, which Denmark can't participate in directly due to its opt-out. In
296-484: A referendum by a margin of 53.2% to 46.8% on a turnout of 87.6%. While the remaining states are all obliged to adopt the euro eventually by the terms of their accession treaties, since membership in the Exchange Rate Mechanism is a prerequisite for euro adoption, and joining ERM is voluntary, these states can ultimately control the timing of their adoption of the euro by deliberately not satisfying
370-647: A Protocol to the treaty . He stated that he was concerned that the Charter would allow the families of ethnic Germans who were expelled from territory in modern-day Czech Republic after the Second World War to challenge the expulsion before the EU's courts. However, legal experts have argued that the laws under which the Germans were expelled, the Beneš decrees , did not fall under the jurisdiction of EU law as
444-670: A case-by-case basis if they desired, subject to unanimous approval of the other participating states. The protocol on the Schengen acquis and protocol on Denmark of the Treaty of Amsterdam stipulate that Denmark , which had signed an accession protocol the Schengen Agreement, would continue to be bound by the provisions and would have the option to participate in future developments of the Schengen acquis, but would do so on an intergovernmental basis rather than under EU law for
518-506: A clarification or interpretation of the provisions to allay fears of alternative interpretations. As part of the 1992 Edinburgh Agreement, Denmark obtained a clarification on the nature of citizenship of the European Union which was proposed in the then yet-to-come-into-force Maastricht Treaty . The Agreement was in the form of a Decision of Council. The part of the agreement, which only applied to Denmark, relating to citizenship
592-614: A consequence, Denmark was excluded from foreign policy discussions with defence implications and did not participate in foreign missions with a defence component. Following the Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the Danish government announced that a referendum would be held on 1 June on abolishing its opt-out from this policy area. The political parties Venstre , the Danish Social Liberal Party and
666-609: A decision should in principle be respected, even if a court outside the Brussels Regime states is selected and is in compliance with the 2005 Hague Choice of Court convention . Article 27(1) of the Brussels Convention and Article 34(1) of the Brussels Regulation contain a public policy clause (or "public policy exception") which states that judgments should not be recognised "if such recognition
740-760: A draft amendment to this effect was proposed by the European Council . However, the Czech Senate passed a resolution in October 2011 opposing their accession to the protocol. When Croatia's Treaty of Accession 2011 was signed in late 2011, the Czech protocol amendment was not included. In October 2012, the European Parliament Constitutional Affairs Committee approved a report that recommended against
814-459: A flexible opt-out from legislation adopted in the area of freedom, security and justice , which includes all matters previously part of the pre-Amsterdam Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) pillar. This allows it to opt-in or out of legislation and legislative initiatives on a case-by-case basis, which it usually does, except on matters related to the Schengen acquis . The opt-out from the JHA policy area
SECTION 10
#1732779888618888-478: A full opt-out from implementing regulations under the area of freedom, security and justice . It came into effect on 1 March 2002. The regulation is fully superseded by a recast Brussels I regulation. In 2005, Denmark signed an international agreement with the European Community to apply the provisions of the 2001 Regulation between the EU and Denmark. The 2005 agreement applies a modified form of
962-496: A guarantee to Denmark that they would not be obliged to join the Western European Union , which was responsible for defence. Additionally, the agreement stipulated that Denmark would not take part in discussions or be bound by decisions of the EU with defence implications. The Treaty of Amsterdam of 1997 included a protocol that formalised this opt-out from the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). As
1036-574: A request to participate in the Schengen acquis in 2002, which was approved by the Council of the European Union. A Council decision in 2020 approved the implementation of the provisions on data protection and Schengen Information System to Ireland. Ireland joined the UK in adopting this opt-out to keep their border with Northern Ireland open via the Common Travel Area (CTA). Prior to
1110-575: Is a set of rules regulating which courts have jurisdiction in legal disputes of a civil or commercial nature between individuals resident in different member states of the European Union (EU) and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). It has detailed rules assigning jurisdiction for the dispute to be heard and governs the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. Five legal instruments together form
1184-568: Is also open to accession by other EFTA states as well as EU states acting on behalf of territories which are not part of the EU. Other states may join subject to approval of the present parties to the treaty. No accessions have taken place so far, but the Kingdom of the Netherlands planned to present to parliament an approval act for accession on behalf of Aruba, Caribbean Netherlands, Curaçao and possibly Sint Maarten in 2014. An amendment to
1258-469: Is conditional on the relevant member states meeting certain benchmarks, and temporary derogations from certain areas of cooperation (such as the Schengen Agreement and the eurozone ) until the relevant member states satisfy the entry conditions. As of 2023, three states have formal opt-outs from a total of four policy areas. All member states other than Denmark have either adopted
1332-743: Is contrary to public policy in the State in which recognition is sought". Implementation in UK law: Opt-outs in the European Union In general, the law of the European Union is valid in all of the twenty-seven European Union member states . However, occasionally member states negotiate certain opt-outs from legislation or treaties of the European Union, meaning they do not have to participate in certain policy areas. Currently, three states have such opt-outs: Denmark ( two opt-outs ), Ireland (two opt-outs) and Poland (one opt-out). The United Kingdom had four opt-outs before leaving
1406-500: Is to promote cooperation within the framework of the multilateral Hague Conventions". The Brussels convention of 1968 (as amended) applied between the UK and Gibraltar before Brexit and, in modified form, still applies today. The Brussels Regime covers legal disputes of a civil or commercial nature. In 1978, the convention was amended to include the sentence: "It shall not extend, in particular, to revenue, customs or administrative matters." The 2012 Regulation further specifies that
1480-677: The Conservative Party had historically supported ending the opt-out, with the Socialist People's Party and the leading Social Democrats changing their position to be in favour in the aftermath of the crisis. Right-wing parties the Danish People's Party and the New Right , as well as the left-wing Unity List , continued to oppose the move. The result of the referendum was a vote of 66.9% in favour of abolishing
1554-578: The European Court of Justice on 1 December 2014. The UK informed the European Council of their decision to exercise their opt-out in July 2013, and as such, the aforementioned legislation ceased to apply to the UK as of 1 December 2014. While the protocol only permitted the UK to either opt-out from all the legislation or none of it, they subsequently opted back into some measures. The UK formally requested to participate in certain provisions of
SECTION 20
#17327798886181628-618: The Treaty of Amsterdam of 1997 incorporated it into the EU treaties , Ireland and the United Kingdom (a member state at the time) received opt-outs from implementing the Schengen acquis as they were the only EU member states that had not signed the agreement. However, the protocol on the Schengen acquis specified that they could request to opt-in to participating in Schengen measures on
1702-568: The renewal of the CTA in 2011 , when the British government was proposing that passports be required for Irish citizens to enter the UK, there were calls for Ireland to join the Schengen Area. However, in response to a question on the issue, Bertie Ahern , the then-incumbent Taoiseach , stated: "On the question of whether this is the end of the common travel area and should we join Schengen,
1776-574: The 2001 Regulation between Denmark and the rest of the EU. It also provides a procedure by which amendments to the regulation are to be implemented by Denmark. It applies the 2001 regulation to Denmark and other EU members from 1 July 2007. Should Denmark decide not to implement any change to the Regulation or its successor, then the Agreement ends automatically. In 2007, the European Community and Denmark signed with Iceland, Switzerland and Norway
1850-539: The Brussels I Regulation are both subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ, now known as CJEU) on questions of interpretation. The Lugano Convention does not require non-EU states to refer questions of interpretation to the ECJ, but has a protocol regarding "uniform interpretation" of the convention, requiring courts "pay due account to the principles laid down by any relevant decision" and allowing for
1924-653: The Brussels I Regulation, covering maintenance obligations , was adopted in 2008. Neither Denmark nor the United Kingdom participated in the regulation, though Denmark notified the Commission of its acceptance of the amendment in January 2009. In 2012, the EU institutions adopted a recast Brussels I Regulation which replaced the 2001 regulation with effect from 10 January 2015. The recast regulation now also applies to jurisdiction regarding non EU residents, it abolishes formalities for recognition of judgments and simplifies
1998-449: The Brussels Regime. All five legal instruments are broadly similar in content and application, with differences in their territory of application. They establish a general rule that individuals are to be sued in their state of domicile and then proceed to provide a list of exceptions. The instruments further provide for the recognition of judgments made in other countries. Recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial cases
2072-464: The Charter can not be applied retroactively. In October 2009, EU leaders agreed to amend the protocol on Poland and the United Kingdom's opt-out to include the Czech Republic at the time of the next accession treaty. In September 2011, the Czech government formally submitted a request to the Council that the promised treaty revisions be made to extend the protocol to the Czech Republic, and
2146-528: The Charter if they were brought to national courts. Poland's then ruling party, Law and Justice , mainly noted concerns that the Charter might force Poland to grant homosexual couples the same kind of benefits that heterosexual couples enjoy. The European Scrutiny Committee of the British House of Commons , including members of both the Labour Party and the Conservative Party , cast doubts on
2220-526: The Civic Platform, later qualified that pledge, stating he would consider the risks before abolishing the opt-out, and on 23 November 2007, he announced that he would not eliminate the Charter opt-out after all (despite the fact that both his party and their coalition partner, the Polish People's Party , were in favour of eliminating it), stating that he wanted to honour the deals negotiated by
2294-709: The Czech Republic's accession to the Protocol. On 11 December 2012, a third draft of the European Parliament's committee report was published, and on 22 May 2013 the Parliament voted in favour of calling on the European Council "not to examine the proposed amendment of the Treaties". The Parliament did, however, give its consent in advance that a treaty revision to add the Czech Republic to
EEX - Misplaced Pages Continue
2368-462: The ERM requirement. Denmark and Ireland have opt-outs from the area of freedom, security and justice in general, while Denmark and Ireland have opt-outs from the Schengen Agreement and Poland has an opt-out from the applicability of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The United Kingdom also had opt-outs from all of these policy areas prior to its withdrawal from the European Union in 2020. Ireland has
2442-474: The Irish electorate in 2008, a number of guarantees (on security and defence, ethical issues and taxation) were given to the Irish in return for holding a second referendum. On the second attempt in 2009 the treaty was approved. Rather than repeat the ratification procedure, the guarantees were merely declarations with a promise to append them to the next treaty. The member states ultimately decided not to sign
2516-562: The Lugano Convention after Brexit , and has secured support from Iceland, Norway and Switzerland for accession. As of January 2021, the accession had not been approved. In May 2021, the European Commission reported to the European Parliament its view that the European Union should not give consent to the accession of the UK, arguing that "the consistent policy of the European Union (with regard to third-countries )
2590-543: The Lugano Convention and did not decide on any further steps." In 2014, the EU amended the Brussels I Regulation to clarify provisions regarding two courts which are "common to several member states": the Unified Patent Court and the Benelux Court of Justice jurisdiction. Denmark again notified the EU that it would apply the amendments. The Lugano Convention Standing Committee considered amending
2664-491: The Lugano Convention with respect to the unitary patent and Unified patent court, but decided to "wait for the results of further study". Until 1 February 2020 all instruments applied in the UK as a result of its EU membership. Until 1 January 2021, under the conditions of the Brexit withdrawal agreement , the instruments remained applicable there, despite Brexit , during a transition period. The UK has sought participation in
2738-429: The Protocol would not require a new convention. In January 2014, following legislative elections the prior October that led to a change in government, the new Czech Human Rights Minister Jiří Dienstbier Jr. said that he would attempt to have his country's request for an opt-out withdrawn. This was confirmed on 20 February 2014 by the new Prime Minister Bohuslav Sobotka , who withdrew the request for an opt-out during
2812-443: The Protocol, and such a possibility remains under review." Several times an EU member state has faced domestic public opposition to the ratification of an EU treaty leading to its rejection in a referendum. To help address the concerns raised, the EU has offered to make a "legal guarantee" to the rejecting state. These guarantees did not purport to exempt the state from any treaty provisions, as an opt-out does. Instead they offered
2886-455: The Schengen acquis – Title III relating to Police Security and Judicial Cooperation – in 1999, and this was approved by the Council of the European Union on 29 May 2000. The implementation of some of the previously approved areas of cooperation to the United Kingdom was approved in a 2004 Council decision that came into effect on 1 January 2005. A subsequent Council decision in 2015 approved
2960-544: The Schengen acquis, the EU and its member states "will consider appropriate measures to be taken". A failure by Denmark to implement a Schengen measure could result in it being excluded from the Schengen Area. The Protocol on Denmark's general opt-out from the AFSJ stipulates that if Denmark exercises its option to convert its opt-out into a flexible opt-in, then it will be become bound by the Schengen acquis under EU law rather than on an intergovernmental basis. Ireland submitted
3034-539: The Treaty of Lisbon has taken place. However, after the treaty entered into force a spokesperson for the Polish President argued that the Charter already applied in Poland and thus it was not necessary to withdraw from the protocol. He also stated that the government was not actively attempting to withdraw from the protocol. Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs Radosław Sikorski , of Civic Platform, argued that
EEX - Misplaced Pages Continue
3108-620: The Union . This is distinct from the enhanced cooperation , a measure introduced in the Treaty of Amsterdam , whereby a minimum of nine member states are allowed to co-operate within the structure of the European Union without involving other member states, after the European Commission and a qualified majority have approved the measure. It is further distinct from the Mechanism for Cooperation and Verification , whose lifting
3182-592: The Union: Aruba , the French overseas territories and Mayotte . It is intended that the Brussels Convention will be replaced by the new Lugano Convention, the latter being open to ratification by EU member states acting on behalf of non-European territories which belong to that member state. In 1988, the then 12 member states of the European Communities signed a treaty, the Lugano Convention with
3256-440: The ability to take the case. That does not mean that the applicable law will be the law of the court. It is possible and frequent to have a national court applying foreign law. In general, it is the domicile of the defendant that determines which of the courts have jurisdiction in a given case. The regime prescribes that, subject to specific rules set out in the various instruments, a person ( legal or natural ) may only be sued in
3330-519: The agreement by then, but it only entered into force on 1 December 2014. During its membership of the European Union, the United Kingdom had five opt-outs from EU legislation (from the Economic and Monetary Union, the area of freedom, security and justice, the Schengen Agreement, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and the Social Chapter), four of them remained in force when it left the EU ,
3404-485: The answer is 'no'." Although Poland participates in the area of freedom, security and justice , it secured — along with another then-member state the United Kingdom — a protocol that clarified how the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union , a part of the Treaty of Lisbon, would interact with national law in their countries limiting the extent that European courts would be able to rule on issues related to
3478-420: The convention on behalf of its extra-EU territories. The 2007 Convention is substantially the same as the 2001 Brussels I Regulation: the main difference being that the word "Regulation" is replaced with the word "Convention" throughout the text. Furthermore, the convention has a slightly different definition of the concept "court" and the 2007 convention is not adapted to the recast of the Brussels Regulation. It
3552-414: The defence opt-out. Following the referendum Denmark formally notified the EU of its renunciation of its opt-out on defence matters on June 20, which became effective from 1 July. Following the announcement by the government of the United Kingdom that it would hold a referendum on withdrawing from the European Union , an agreement was reached between it and the EU on renegotiated membership terms should
3626-408: The euro or are legally bound to do so. The Maastricht Treaty of 1992 included protocols on the UK (a member state at the time) and Denmark giving them opt-outs with the right to decide if and when they would join the euro. Denmark subsequently notified the Council of the European Communities of their decision to opt-out of the euro, and this was included as part of the 1992 Edinburgh Agreement ,
3700-402: The euro prior to the 2015 general election . Under Protocol 36 of the Lisbon Treaty , the United Kingdom had the option to opt-out of all police and criminal justice legislation adopted prior to the treaty's entry into force which had not been subsequently amended. The decision to opt-out had to be made at least six months prior to the aforementioned measures coming under the jurisdiction of
3774-404: The exchange of relevant judgments. Nevertheless, various divergences have arisen between member states in the interpretation of the Lugano Convention. The Brussels Regime generally allows jurisdiction clauses in contracts, which preserves the right of parties to reach agreement at the time of contracting as to which court should govern any dispute. After the 2012 regulation enters into force, such
SECTION 50
#17327798886183848-479: The implementation of the provisions on data protection and Schengen Information System to the UK. The opt-out was criticised in the United Kingdom for hampering the country's capabilities to stop transnational crime as a result of the inability to access the Schengen Information System . The United Kingdom secured its opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU because it
3922-443: The member state in which he or she has its habitual residence or domicile. This is determined by the law of the court hearing the case, so that a person can be domiciled in more than one state simultaneously. However, "domicile" does not have the same meaning as that given to it by common law . Article 4 also allows a person domiciled in any member state to take advantage of another member state's exorbitant bases of jurisdiction on
3996-520: The most of any member state. In the United Kingdom, the Labour government of Tony Blair argued that the country should revoke its EMU opt-out and join the euro, contingent on approval in a referendum, if five economic tests were met. However, the assessment of those tests in June 2003 concluded that not all were met. The policy of the 2010s coalition government, elected in 2010 , was against introducing
4070-536: The national law of the Member State concerned. The guarantee to Denmark on citizenship was never incorporated into the treaties, but the substance of this statement was subsequently added to the Amsterdam Treaty and applies to all member states. Article 2 states that: Citizenship of the Union shall complement and not replace national citizenship. Following the rejection of the Treaty of Lisbon by
4144-626: The negotiations of the Lisbon Treaty, Denmark obtained an amendment to the protocol to give it the option to convert its opt-out from the Area of freedom, security and justice (which had incorporated the former Justice and Home Affairs pillar) into a flexible opt-in modelled on the Irish and British opt-outs. In a referendum on 3 December 2015 , 53.1% rejected exercising this option. The Schengen Agreement abolished border controls between European Community member states which acceded to it. When
4218-451: The new Lugano Convention . This treaty was intended to replace both the old Lugano Convention of 1988 and the Brussels Convention and as such was open to signature to both EFTA member states and to EU member state on behalf of their extra-EU territories. While the former purpose was achieved in 2011 with the ratification of all EFTA member states (bar Liechtenstein which never signed the 1988 Convention), no EU member state has yet acceded to
4292-494: The only state to accede to the EFTA after 1988, has not signed either the 1988 Convention or its successor, the 2007 Lugano Convention. The convention is fully superseded by a 2007 version. The Brussels I Regulation of 2001 was the primary piece of legislation in the Brussels framework from 2002 until January 2015. It substantially replaced the 1968 Brussels Convention, and applied to all EU member states excluding Denmark, which has
4366-557: The previous government and that he needed the support of Law and Justice to gain the two-thirds majority in the Parliament of Poland required to approve ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon . Shortly after the signature of the treaty, the Polish Sejm passed a resolution that expressed its desire to be able to withdraw from the Protocol. Tusk later clarified that he may sign up to the Charter after successful ratification of
4440-422: The procedure for a court chosen by the parties to commence proceedings (even if proceedings have started in another member state already). In December 2012 Denmark notified the Commission of its decision to implement the contents of 2012 regulation. The Lugano Convention Standing committee considered amending the Lugano Convention in accordance with the recast, but "made no recommendation on the possible amendment of
4514-651: The protocol alongside the Croatian accession treaty , but rather as a single document. A draft protocol to this effect was proposed by the European Council and adopted by the European Parliament in April 2012. An Intergovernmental Conference followed on 16 May, and the protocol was signed by all states of the European Union between that date and 13 June 2012. The protocol was planned to take effect from 1 July 2013, provided that all member states had ratified
SECTION 60
#17327798886184588-524: The protocol only narrowly modified the charter's application in Poland, and that formally renouncing the opt-out would require a treaty amendment that would need to be ratified by all EU member states. In April 2012, Leszek Miller , leader of the Democratic Left Alliance , stated that he would sign the charter if he comes to power. According to Andrew Duff , British Member of the European Parliament , "A Polish constitutional mechanism has since been devised whereby Poland can decide to amend or to withdraw from
4662-404: The protocol's text, asserting that the clarification might not have been worded strongly and clearly enough to achieve the government's aims. After the Civic Platform won the 2007 parliamentary election in Poland, it announced that it would not opt-out from the Charter, leaving the United Kingdom as the only state not to adopt it. However, Donald Tusk , the new Prime Minister and leader of
4736-464: The provisions that fell under the Justice and Home Affairs pillar, from which Denmark obtained an opt-out. When a measure is adopted which builds upon the Schengen acquis, Denmark has six months to decide whether to implement it. If Denmark decides to implement the measure, it takes the force of an international agreement between Denmark and the Schengen states. However, the protocol stipulates that if Denmark chooses not to implement future developments of
4810-467: The regulation shall not extend to "the liability of the State for acts and omissions in the exercise of State authority ( acta iure imperii )." There are some exceptions limiting the scope of this. Where the principal matter of a dispute is one of family law , bankruptcy or insolvency , social security , or relates to arbitration , the case is not subject to the rules. The regulation aims at jurisdiction, i.e., determining which court or courts will have
4884-408: The same basis as a national of that state. This is useful in cases where a member state, such as France , allows its nationals to sue anyone in their courts, so that someone domiciled in a member state like Finland may sue someone domiciled in a non-member state like Canada , in the courts of a third party member state, like France, where the defendant may have assets . The Brussels Convention and
4958-421: The state vote to remain a member. In addition to a number of amendments to EU Regulations which would apply to all states, a legal guarantee would be granted to the UK that would explicitly exempt it from the treaty-stated symbolic goal of creating an "ever closer union" by deepening integration. This guarantee was included in a Decision by the European Council , with the promise that it would be incorporated into
5032-424: The then six members of the European Free Trade Association : Austria, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland. The Lugano Convention served to extend the recognition regime to EFTA member state who are not eligible to sign the Brussels Convention. Other than the original signatories–three of which left EFTA to join the EU in 1995–only Poland has subsequently acceded to the Lugano Convention. Liechtenstein ,
5106-460: The title EEX . If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article. Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=EEX&oldid=874354546 " Category : Disambiguation pages Hidden categories: Short description is different from Wikidata All article disambiguation pages All disambiguation pages Brussels Regime The Brussels Regime
5180-412: The treaties during their next revision. However, following the referendum, in which the UK voted to leave the EU, per the terms of the Decision the provisions lapsed. In 2009, Czech President Václav Klaus refused to complete ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon unless the Czech Republic was given an opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights , as Poland and the United Kingdom had been with
5254-408: Was as follows: The provisions of Part Two of the Treaty establishing the European Community relating to citizenship of the Union give nationals of the Member States additional rights and protection as specified in that Part. They do not in any way take the place of national citizenship. The question whether an individual possesses the nationality of a Member State will be settled solely by reference to
5328-582: Was originally accomplished within the European Communities by the 1968 Brussels Convention , a treaty signed by the then six members of the Communities. This treaty was amended on several occasions and was almost completely superseded by a regulation adopted in 2001, the Brussels I Regulation. Today the convention only applies between the 15 pre-2004 members of the European Union and certain territories of EU member states that are outside
5402-501: Was originally obtained by Ireland and the United Kingdom in a protocol to the Treaty of Amsterdam of 1997, and was retained by both in the Treaty of Lisbon. In contrast, Denmark has a more rigid opt-out from the area of freedom, security and justice. While the Edinburgh Agreement of 1992 stipulated that "Denmark will participate fully in cooperation on Justice and Home Affairs", the Treaty of Amsterdam of 1997 included
5476-598: Was worried that it might be used to alter British labour law, especially as relates to allowing more strikes. The Major ministry secured the United Kingdom an opt-out from the protocol on the Social Chapter of the Maastricht Treaty before it was signed in 1992. The Blair ministry abolished this opt-out after coming to power in the 1997 general election as part of the text of the Treaty of Amsterdam . The Edinburgh Agreement of 1992 included
#617382