Tarjei Bekkedal

• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2025). Kontinentalsoklene i Norges fire avtaler med EU. Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. 64(5), p. 291–313. doi: 10.18261/lor.64.5.3. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  EØS-avtalens anvendelsesområde fastlegges etter funksjonelle kriterier som i EU-retten. Rekkevidden sammenfaller med EØS-medlemsstatenes suverenitet og jurisdiksjon. EØS-avtalen anvendes på samme måte på alle EØS-landenes kontinentalsokler. I denne artikkelen underbygger vi standpunktet ved å analysere avtalene om EU-medlemskap fra 1972 og 1994, Frihandelsavtalen mellom Norge og EF fra 1973, EØS-avtalen – og regjeringens redegjørelser for disse fire avtalene til Stortinget. Stortingsflertallet har vært kjent med EU-rettens funksjonelle tilnærming. Denne ligger til grunn for samtlige av Norges avtaler, både som rettslig premiss, og som politisk ønsket. Ingen av Norges fire avtaler med EU oppstiller en geografisk avgrensning. Alle kommer etter vanlig tolkning til anvendelse på norsk kontinentalsokkel. Strategien som ligger til grunn for Norges standpunkt, ble utpenslet av Jens Evensen i 1971. Konsekvent og uten unntak har skiftende regjeringer og stortingsflertall holdt fast ved den, helt frem til nytolkingen i Stortingsmelding nr. 5 (2012–2013) om at EØS-avtalen skal gjelde på EU-statenes kontinentalsokler, men ikke tilsvarende på soklene til EFTA-statene Norge og Island.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). Why not the Charter? Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law (MJ). ISSN 1023-263X. 32(2), p. 213–236. doi: 10.1177/1023263x251341679. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) extends the internal market of the EU to Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. The special relationship is predicated on a set of common constitutional values and traditions that allow an area without internal borders to be created and maintained. Within the EEA EU pillar, the association agreement constitutes an integral part of Union law. Its application will trigger the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Within the EEA EFTA pillar, the EFTA Court still resorts to the European Convention on Human Rights. Its approach resembles the jurisprudence of the ECJ before the entry into force of the Charter. The current lack of homogeneity rejects the common values upon which the association agreement is founded and undermines the foreseeability that is the prerequisite for a ‘practical and effective’ protection of fundamental rights. It is time to recognize the Charter as an expression of general principles that are intrinsic to the structure and objectives of EEA law.

• Petti, Alessandro; Hillion, Christophe & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). Fundamental Rights protection in Europe: Shedding light on a system of interrelated regimes. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law (MJ). ISSN 1023-263X. 32(2), p. 110–110. doi: 10.1177/1023263x251342875. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2024). EØS-avtalen og kontinentalsoklene. Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. doi: 10.18261/lor.63.1.3. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2023). Book Review: The Boundaries of the EU Internal Market: Participation without Membership By Marja-Liisa Öberg, (Cambridge University Press, 2020). Common market law review. ISSN 0165-0750. doi: 10.54648/cola2023037. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2022). Er mottakere av dagpenger beskyttet av EØS-avtalens grunnleggende rett til fri bevegelighet? Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. 61(3), p. 145–169. doi: 10.18261/lor.61.3.3. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  I sykepengesaken/NAV-saken fastslo EFTA domstolen og Høyesterett at folketrygdlovens oppholdskrav for mottakere av sykepenger er i strid med EØS-avtalen. Grunnlaget er dobbelt: EØS-avtalens hoveddel beskytter enhver tjenestemottakers rett til fri bevegelighet. Trygdeforordningen (883/2004) beskytter sykepengemottakeres rett til å eksportere sykepenger. Folketrygdloven oppstiller tilsvarende oppholdskrav for mottakere av dagpenger. I to rådgivende uttalelser fra juni 2021 konkluderte EFTA-domstolen motsatt av i sykepengesaken. Den la til grunn at trygdeforordningens særregler om ytelser ved arbeidsledighet ikke forbyr nasjonale oppholdskrav. I tillegg mente EFTA-domstolen at reglene om dagpenger i trygdeforordningen fullharmoniserer arbeidslediges bevegelsesfrihet, slik at rettighetene i EØS-avtalens hoveddel ikke kommer til anvendelse. Artikkelen forsvarer et motsatt standpunkt. Det er sikker rett at trygdeforordningens formål er begrenset til koordinering. Vilkårene for å motta og opprettholde trygdeytelser er det medlemsstatene som bestemmer. Måten dette handlingsrommet utøves på, ligger utenfor forordningen. Nasjonalt fastsatte oppholdskrav må sammenholdes med den grunnleggende retten til fri bevegelighet i EØS-avtalens hoveddel og proporsjonalitetsprinsippet.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2022). On an equal footing. The EFTA Court’s ruling in the Norwegian Social Security scandal: Criminal proceedings against N. Common market law review. ISSN 0165-0750. doi: 10.54648/cola2022011. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2022). The Application of EU Internal Competences in an External Context: UK v Council (EEA). In Butler, Graham & Wessel, Ramses A. (Ed.), EU External Relations Law: The Cases in Context. Hart Publishing Ltd. ISSN 9781509939725. doi: 10.5040/9781509939725.ch-065. Full text in Research Archive
• Andenæs, Mads & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2022). The reach of jobseeker rights to free movement: On the complementary relationship between primary and secondary law. Oslo Law Review. 9(1), p. 4–25. doi: 10.18261/olr.9.1.1. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The reach of jobseeker rights to free movement depends on the relationship between norms at different levels of European Union (EU) law. The default methodological approach to these norms misapplies the conflict of norms doctrine in constitutional theory. Rights are read down based on an analysis of how the norms relate to, reinforce or otherwise affect each other as parts of a hierarchical whole. We advance a different approach and take as our starting point that the fundamental status of a jobseeker is that of Union citizen. Union citizens have a plethora of rights that are complementary. Citizens may optimise their legal position by invoking, or not invoking, rights. In the first place, courts and other judicial authorities must make sense of the actual choice made by the Union citizen rather than any abstract hierarchy of norms. We analyse the rights of jobseekers to reside in the host state, to export unemployment benefits for a period greater than the three months granted by Regulation 883/2004, and to retain unemployment benefits when they stay in a state other than the competent state without any intention of seeking work there. Our approach shows that the Court of Justice of the EU has resolved these matters in an entirely coherent manner.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2021). Autonomy or Unity? Investment Protection (ISDS) and the Principle of Equality Before the Law. European Papers (EP). 6(1), p. 713–739. doi: 10.15166/2499-8249/496. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  According to Opinion 1/17, the ISDS mechanism contained in CETA is in conformity with the fundamental requirement of art. 20 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights that “everyone is equal before the law”. The assessment rests on two assumptions. First, in the substantive sense, CETA does not afford a higher level of protection to Canadian investors than EU law affords to European investors. In this respect, investors of different origins are equals who are treated equally. Secondly, ISDS provides specific procedural rights to foreign investors, which cannot be invoked by domestic investors. According to the ECJ, Canadian investors are not legally obliged to have the same trust in the institutional system of the EU as domestic investors. In this respect, Canadian investors are different from European investors, thus it is justified to treat them differently. The Article shows that in addition to the Court’s assessment of substantive and procedural aspects, art. 20 CFR can be constructed to contain a systemic requirement of unity. The paper identifies a looming conflict between EU law’s autonomy and Law’s unity that may explain why the Court chose not to engage in a more open-hearted attempt to identify the values inherent in art. 20 CFR. Due to its strong protection of the autonomy of EU law, the ECJ has embraced what is in fact the main problem of the ISDS mechanism – its complete disentanglement from the legal order that it scrutinizes. In the absence of unity, autonomy’s guarantor – “everyone” – is cut off.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2020). The Internal, Systemic, and Constitutional Integrity of EU Regulation 883/2004 on the Coordination of Social Security Systems: Lessons from a Scandal. Oslo Law Review. p. 145–167. doi: 10.18261/ISSN.2387-3299-2020-03-02. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The Norwegian social security scandal concerns the right to export sickness benefits pursuant to EU Regulation 883/2004 on the Coordination of Social Security Systems. The Regulation is binding in Norway due to its membership in the EEA Agreement. Nonetheless, the Regulation has been largely disregarded in that country, and thousands of social security claims have been rejected, as Norway’s Social Security Act requires continued presence in Norway to retain payable benefits. In this context, some hundred individuals have been sentenced to prison for welfare fraud because they stayed in another EU/EEA State and exported cash benefits in the absence of a prior authorisation from Norwegian authorities. Yet, legal uncertainty seems to remain, and the exact scope of the scandal is still unclear. The paper discusses the reach and depth of the rights afforded by Regulation 883/2004. It argues that the Regulation’s main rules on equal treatment (Articles 4 and 5) and the main rule on free movement (Article 7) provide an unconditional right to export sickness benefits in cash. It also provides an account of the internal, systemic, and constitutional integrity of the Regulation, and the equilibrium between coordination and harmonisation.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2020). Understanding the nature of the EEA Agreement: On the direct applicability of regulations. Common market law review. ISSN 0165-0750. 57(3), p. 773–798. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  In two judgments, the European Court of Justice has stated that regulations are directly applicable under the EEA Agreement and automatically become part of the internal legal order of the EEA EFTA States.The EFTA Court has taken the opposite position. In legal literature, the ECJ’s interpretation of Article 7 EEA has been dismissed as a plain misunderstanding. This paper sides with the ECJ; it shows that a principle of direct applicability is consistent with the wording of Article 7 EEA and that the principles of homogeneity and loyalty underpin the Court’s reasoning. Formally, the ECJ’s interpretation of Article 7 EEA is not binding on the EFTA Court or the EEA EFTA States. The EFTA Court should however consider whether legal and factual developments justify a revision of its current position. It would serve the interests of the dualist EEA EFTA States to embrace the ECJ’s position.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2020). The internal, systemic and constitutional integrity of EU regulation 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems: Lessons from a scandal. Oslo Law Review. 7(3), p. 145–167. doi: 10.18261/ISSN.2387-3299-2020-03-02. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2019). Third State Participation In EU Agencies: Exploring The EEA Precedent. Common market law review. ISSN 0165-0750. 56(2), p. 381–416. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The EEA EFTA States are the only non-EU States that have been allowed, on a regular basis, to participate in the work of EU agencies governing the internal market. Participation in the work of an agency does not include the right to vote, nor are third States automatically bound by decisions enacted by the agency. Participation “in the work” of an EU agency is a way of providing decision-shaping rights in exchange to third countries that are willing to enter into mechanisms that grant the binding effect of agency decisions in their territories. As these mechanisms are intertwined with the attribution of decision-shaping rights, the arrangements for participation in the work of an EU agency become highly complex. The paper identifies and examines four different models for participation. It argues that the direct participation of third countries in EU agencies, with voting rights, would be favourable compared to the current approach.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2018). Article 59 [Public undertakings, services of general economic interest]. In Arnesen, Finn; Fredriksen, Halvard Haukeland; Graver, Hans Petter; Mestad, Ola & Vedder, Christoph (Ed.), Agreement on the European Economic Area - A Commentary. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG. ISSN 9783848732197. p. 568–584. doi: 10.5771/9783845275796-568. Full text in Research Archive
• Hertzberg, Ingrid & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2018). Kompetanse uten kontroll? Om Norges tilslutning til EUs finansbyråer (II). Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. p. 205–226. doi: 10.18261/issn.1504-3061-2018-04-03. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Hertzberg, Ingrid (2018). Suverenitet og homogenitet. Om Norges tilslutning til EUs finansbyråer (I). Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. p. 131–157. doi: 10.18261/issn.1504-3061-2018-03-02. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Farsethås, Hans Christian (2018). Om subsumsjon. Jussens Venner. ISSN 0022-6971. 53(1), p. 1–32. doi: 10.18261/issn.1504-3126-2018-01-01. Full text in Research Archive
• Hillion, Christophe Alfred Pierre; Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2018). Brexit, EØS og Norge. Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. 57(10), p. 604–624. doi: 10.18261/issn.1504-3061-2018-10-03. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2017). The Reach of Free Movement. A Defence of Court Discretion. In Andenæs, Mads; Bekkedal, Tarjei & Pantaleo, Luca (Ed.), The Reach of Free Movement. T.M.C. Asser Press. ISSN 9789462651951. p. 17–56. doi: 10.1007/978-94-6265-195-1_2. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The reach of free movement within the EU Internal Market and what constitutes a restriction are the topics of this book. For many years the tension between free movement and restrictions have been the subject of intense discussion and controversy, and this includes the constitutional reach of the rights conferred by the Treaty of Lisbon. Anything that makes movement less attractive or more burdensome may constitute a restriction. Restrictions may be justified, but only if proportionate. The reach of free movement is fundamental to the Internal Market, both for the economic constitution and increasingly for individual rights in a European legal order that provides constitutional guarantees for rights, exceeding those of free movement. The interaction between fundamental rights and fundamental freedoms to movement distinguishes the EU legal order from the national legal systems. The book falls into four parts, namely ‘The reach of free movement', ’Justifications and Proportionality’, ‘Fundamental rights’, and ‘Looking Abroad’. The clear discussion of the fundamentals and dilemmas regarding the subject of this book should prove useful for academics, practitioners, graduate students as well as EU officials and judges wishing to stay updated on the ongoing scholarly debate regarding relevance to case law. Mads Andenas is Professor at the Department of Private Law, University of Oslo and at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, School of Advanced Studies, University of London. Tarjei Bekkedal is Professor at the Centre for European Law, University of Oslo and the Chair of the Norwegian Association for European Law. Luca Pantaleo is a Lecturer in EU law at The Hague University of Applied Science, who obtained a PhD in International and EU Law in 2013 at the University of Macerata in Italy, and who was previously a Senior Researcher at the T.M.C. Asser Institute and Postdoctoral researcher at the University of Luxembourg.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2017). Overkonstitusjonalisert og underanalysert. En EØS-rettslig analyse av Høyesteretts plenumsavgjørelse i Havnearbeiderdommen. Jussens Venner. ISSN 0022-6971. 52(5), p. 273–314. doi: 10.18261/issn.1504-3126-2017-05-01. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Plenumsavgjørelsen i Havnearbeiderdommen gjaldt konflikten mellom etableringsfriheten jf. EØS-avtalen artikkel 31 og registrerte havnearbeideres fortrinnsrett til å utføre havnearbeid (godshåndtering) jf. ILO-konvensjon nr. 137. Flertallet i Høyesterett valgte å løfte avveiningen opp på et konstitusjonelt plan – derfor er avgjørelsen prinsipielt viktig. Dommen angår forholdet mellom Grunnloven, menneskerettighetene, EØS-avtalen, andre internasjonale konvensjoner og EUs Charter om fundamentale rettigheter, den understreker respekten for EFTA-domstolen og den bekrefter homogenitetsmålsettingens styrke og gjennomslagskraft. Flertallets abstraksjonsnivå fremstår som en overkonstitusjonalisering av tvisten. Samtidig er det konkrete standpunktet i saken – subsumsjonen – i beste fall underanalysert. Utfallet kan langt på vei fremstå som foreldet etter at EU på tredje forsøk fikk på plass sekundærlovgivning på området – forordningen om havnetjenester vedtatt 15. februar 2017.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2016). Investeringstraktater med investor-stat tvisteløsning (ISDS) - i strid med Grunnloven? Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. 55(6), p. 331–352. doi: 10.18261/issn.1504-3061-2016-06-02. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  I 2015 fremla regjeringen et utkast til norsk modellavtale for bilaterale investeringstraktater med voldgiftsklausul. Et viktig siktemål bak arbeidet med modellavtalen er at Norges løsning også skal kunne danne basis for felles EFTA-posisjoner. Senere har EU-kommisjonen signalisert at den vil forkaste voldgift som tvisteløsningsmekanisme i bilaterale handelsavtaler sluttet av EU. Artikkelen viser hvorfor voldgift er lite egnet som tvisteløsningsmekanisme i avanserte bilaterale handelsavtaler. En slik ordning vil stå i et spenningsforhold til Grunnloven § 75 og § 121 om Stortingets lovgivende og grunnlovgivende myndighet, Grunnloven § 92 om vernet av menneskerettighetene og verdiparagrafen i Grunnloven § 2.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2016). Suverenitet og samarbeid. Grunnlovens skranker for delegasjon av statsmakt. Kritisk juss. ISSN 0804-7375. 42(1), p. 3–37. doi: 10.18261/issn.2387-4546-2016-01-02. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Effektivt internasjonalt samarbeid kan fordre at Norge overfører lovgivende, utøvende eller dømmende myndighet til internasjonale organer – for eksempel til internasjonale handelsdomstoler eller til EUs forvaltningsbyråer. I sin praksis antar Justisdepartementets lovavdeling at grunnloven forutsetter at myndighet med direkte virkning i Norge skal utøves av norske organer. Artikkelen hevder at en slik tilnærming er for restriktiv. Stortinget kan delegere myndighet gjennom alminnelig lovvedtak, jf. grunnloven § 75. Det som må begrunnes, er ikke adgangen til å fatte slikt lovvedtak, men eventuelle begrensninger. Artikkelen analyserer de relevante skrankene – selvstendighetskravet i grunnloven § 1, medlemskapsprinsippet i grunnloven § 115 og grunnlovens respektive bestemmelser om lovgivende, utøvende og dømmende myndighet. Analysen viser at handlingsrommet for myndighetsoverføring er større enn antatt i dagens praksis.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2015). Om grunnlovens medlemskapsprinsipp ved overføring av myndighet til internasjonale organisasjoner. Kritisk juss. ISSN 0804-7375. 41(4), p. 197–230. doi: 10.18261/issn.2387-4546-2016-01-02. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  I gjeldende konstitusjonell doktrine er det antatt at myndigheten til å binde Norge folkerettslig fritt kan overføres, i medhold av grunnloven § 26 andre ledd. Overføring av intern myndighet – lovgivende, dømmende og administrativ kompetanse – krever i hovedregelen at Stortinget avgir samtykke i medhold av grunnloven § 115, noe som forutsetter norsk medlemskap. Artikkelen hevder at den tradisjonelle sondringen mellom folkerettslig virkning og «direkte virkning» er av underordnet betydning. Grunnlovens viktigste skillelinje er om Norge er medlem av den organisasjonen som det er snakk om å overføre myndighet til. Medlemskapsprinsippet i grunnloven § 115 gjelder også ved overføring av myndigheten til å binde Norge folkerettslig.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2015). Kontraktsrettens betydning på familierettens område. Jussens Venner. ISSN 0022-6971. 50(3), p. 150–184. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2015). Lengstlevendes rådighet over uskifteboet. Tidsskrift for familierett, arverett og barnevernrettslige spørsmål. ISSN 1503-2965. 13(1), p. 59–96. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2015). Avveiningen mellom ytringsfriheten og privatlivets fred - replikk til Ellen Lexerød Hovlid. Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. 54(2). Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2014). Avveiningen mellom ytringsfriheten og privatlivets fred - om EMDs balansetest. Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. 53(6), p. 315–333. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2014). To høyesterettsdommer om naturutlegg etter ekteskapslovens § 67 - Rt.2013 s. 1630 og Rt. 2013 s. 1637. Nytt i privatretten : nyhetsbrev for informasjon på det privatret. ISSN 1501-9594. 16(1), p. 14–16. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2012). Om dom for realiteten i forvaltningssaker. Grunnlag for en ny teori om domstolenes kontroll med forvaltningens maktutøvelse. Jussens Venner. ISSN 0022-6971. 47(4), p. 217–249. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2012). Felles prosjekt; om sameie i ekteskaps- og samboerforhold. Jussens Venner. ISSN 0022-6971. 47(3), p. 159–183. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2006). Privilegerte foretak og monopoler fellesskapsrettens skranker. Jussens Venner. ISSN 0022-6971. 41(3), p. 142–170. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2004). Digitalt bakkenett for kringkasting og EØS-avtalen. Tidsskrift for forretningsjus. ISSN 0805-4355. p. 92–118. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2003). Økonomisk utnyttelse av opphavsretten til kringkastingssendringer - vurdert i et konkurranserettslig perspektiv. In Schovsbo, Jens (Eds.), Immaterial rettens afbalancering. Netværksmødet 2003. Jurist- og Økonomforbundets Forlag. ISSN 9788757402070. p. 43–58. Full text in Research Archive

View all works in NVA

• Andenæs, Mads; Bekkedal, Tarjei & Pantaleo, Luca (2017). The Reach of Free Movement. T.M.C. Asser Press. ISBN 9789462651951. 417 p. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The reach of free movement within the EU Internal Market and what constitutes a restriction are the topics of this book. For many years the tension between free movement and restrictions have been the subject of intense discussion and controversy, and this includes the constitutional reach of the rights conferred by the Treaty of Lisbon. Anything that makes movement less attractive or more burdensome may constitute a restriction. Restrictions may be justified, but only if proportionate. The reach of free movement is fundamental to the Internal Market, both for the economic constitution and increasingly for individual rights in a European legal order that provides constitutional guarantees for rights, exceeding those of free movement. The interaction between fundamental rights and fundamental freedoms to movement distinguishes the EU legal order from the national legal systems. The book falls into four parts, namely ‘The reach of free movement', ’Justifications and Proportionality’, ‘Fundamental rights’, and ‘Looking Abroad’. The clear discussion of the fundamentals and dilemmas regarding the subject of this book should prove useful for academics, practitioners, graduate students as well as EU officials and judges wishing to stay updated on the ongoing scholarly debate regarding relevance to case law. Mads Andenas is Professor at the Department of Private Law, University of Oslo and at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, School of Advanced Studies, University of London. Tarjei Bekkedal is Professor at the Centre for European Law, University of Oslo and the Chair of the Norwegian Association for European Law. Luca Pantaleo is a Lecturer in EU law at The Hague University of Applied Science, who obtained a PhD in International and EU Law in 2013 at the University of Macerata in Italy, and who was previously a Senior Researcher at the T.M.C. Asser Institute and Postdoctoral researcher at the University of Luxembourg.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei; Madell, Tom & Neergaard, Ulla (2011). Den nordiska välfärden och marknaden. Nordiska erfarenheter av tjänter av allmän intresse i en EU-rättslig kontext. Iustus förlag. ISBN 9789176787823. 399 p. Full text in Research Archive
• Andenæs, Mads; Szyszczak, Erika; Davies, Jim & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2011). Developments in Services of General Interest. T.M.C. Asser Press. ISBN 9789067047333. 266 p. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2008). Frihet, likhet og fellesskap. Fagbokforlaget. ISBN 9788245007442. 515 p. Full text in Research Archive

View all works in NVA

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2026). Why not the Charter? Sovereignty! Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2026). Bonden får regningen for lovens systemfeil. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2026). Overtid når solen skinner. doi: https:/www.dn.no/innlegg/overtid-nar-solen-skinner/2-1-2036824. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2026). Bare lønn når solen skinner? doi: https:/www.dn.no/innlegg/eu-domstolen/midlertidige-stillinger/overtid/bare-lonn-nar-solen-skinner/2-1-2028670. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2026). EØS-retten og EUs charter om grunnleggende rettigheter. Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. 65(2), p. 79–80. doi: https:/www.scup.com/doi/10.18261/lor.65.2.2. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). EU straffer Norge. [TV]. nrk. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). Det er ikke EU som bryter EØS-avtalen, det er Norge. doi: https:/www.dn.no/innlegg/toll/proteksjonisme/handelskrig/det-er-ikke-eu-som-bryter-eos-avtalen-det-er-norge/2-1-1906400. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). Det kjente og ukjente charteret. Full text in Research Archive
• Bø, Øyvind; Sætervadet, Torkell & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). Høyesterett anerkjenner en generell rett til fri bevegelighet i EØS. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Storkammeravgjørelsen avslutter striden om rekkevidden av bevegelsesfriheten for økonomisk inaktive personer.

• Bø, Øyvind; Sætervadet, Torkell & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). På tide å erkjenne at personer har rett til fri bevegelighet i EØS. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Det har blitt hevdet at «fri bevegelighet for personer» var begrenset til økonomisk aktive da EØS-avtalen ble inngått. Dette er ikke riktig.

• Bø, Øyvind; Sætervadet, Torkell & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). En generell rett til fri bevegelighet for personer i EØS. Full text in Research Archive
• Bø, Øyvind; Sætervadet, Torkell & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). Høyesteretts anerkjenner fri bevegelighet for økonomisk inaktive personer i HR-2025-490-S (MH). Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2024). Regjeringen kan gå på ydmykende nederlag i prestisjesak rett før valget. [Journal]. Aftenposten (morgenutg. : trykt utg.). doi: 10.54648/cola2023037. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2023). Omkamp om omvendt legalitetsprinsipp. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2023). Fri bevegelighet for personer: Uvilje mot folkevilje. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2023). Rett til kollektive forhandlinger for oppdragstakere. Menneskerettslige perspektiver. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2023). Endret arbeidstakerdefinisjon og arbeidstakerpresumsjon opp mot plattformdirektivet. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2023). Tariffavtaler: Hvilke føringer gir EØS-retten? Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2022). Stortinget kan ikke lovfeste blindsonen. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2022). Ingen blindsone, men bom. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2022). Lærte man noe av trygdeskandalen? Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2022). Syv jusprofessorer: Hemmelighold kaster skygge over oppryddingen etter Nav-skandalen. [Journal]. Aftenposten morgenutgave trykt. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2022). Ut av blindsonen. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2022). Judicial Review of Central Banks in Norway. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2022). Sentralbankens makt. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2021). EMDs avgjørelse i Holship – kampen om det rettslige hegemoniet i Europa. Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. doi: 10.18261/issn.1504-3061-2021-07-02. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2021). Book review: Carl Baudenbacher, Restoring the Balance in the European Economic Area. Luxembourg: European Law Reporter, 2021. Common market law review. ISSN 0165-0750. 58(6), p. 1922–1924. Full text in Research Archive
• Fredriksen, Halvard Haukeland; Franklin, Christian; Arnesen, Finn; Bekkedal, Tarjei; Johansen, Stian Øby & Rognstad, Ole-Andreas (2021). Transparency in the judicial proceedings before the EFTA Court. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2020). Nav-saken, likebehandlingsprinsippet og retten til fri bevegelighet. Lov og Rett. ISSN 0024-6980. 59(4), p. 191–212. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2019). Har forordninger direkte virkning under EØS-avtalen? Tidsskrift for Rettsvitenskap. ISSN 0040-7143. 132(3-4), p. 342–378. Full text in Research Archive
• Ikdahl, Ingunn; Eriksen, Christoffer Conrad & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2019). Fem grunner til at Tolley-saken er viktig. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2004). Konkurransesituasjonen for norske medier. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2004). EØS-avtalen artikkel 59. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2026). Inngrep i deltidsansattes rett til likebehandling og reell likelønn. Faggruppen i EU-rett, UiO. doi: https:/www.jus.uio.no/forskning/faggrupper/eu-rett/vedlegg/working-paper-inngrep-i-deltidsansattes-rett-til-likebehandling.pdf. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2026). Deltid som diskrimineringsgrunnlag. Faggruppen i EU-rett, UiO. doi: https:/www.jus.uio.no/forskning/faggrupper/eu-rett/vedlegg/working-paper-deltid-som-selvstendig-diskrimineringsgrunnlag-publ.pdf. Full text in Research Archive
• Solem, Nicholas Bertheau & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2024). Gjensidig anerkjennelse av yrkeskvalifikasjoner i EØS-retten. Universitetet i Oslo. Full text in Research Archive
• Tandberg, Per Silnes & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2024). En nøkkel, mange dører: En analyse av trygdeforordningens enstatsprinsipp og lovvalgsreglene som gjelder for EØS-arbeidstakere. Universitetet i Oslo. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2019). Egnethetsprøving av store eiere i finansforetak, utredning avlevert til Finansdepartementet. Senter for europarett. Full text in Research Archive
• Melchior, Arne; Alvik, Ivar; Bekkedal, Tarjei; Medin, Hege; Grünfeld, Leo A. & Theie, Marcus Gjems [Show all 10 contributors for this article] (2016). TTIP og Norge: Virkninger og handlingsvalg. Norsk Utenrikspolitisk Institutt. Full text in Research Archive
• Hillion, Christophe Alfred Pierre; Alvik, Ivar & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2016). Norges plass i partnerskapet mellom EU og USA – institusjonelle og regulatoriske aspekter. Norsk Utenrikspolitisk Institutt. ISSN 9788270023370. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Abstract Det følgende omfatter to delrapporter som tjener som underlagsmateriale for sammenfatningene i hovedrapporten TTIP og Norge: Virkninger og handlingsvalg; henholdsvis delrapport I: Norsk deltakelse i handels-partnerskapet mellom EU og USA og delrapport II: Investeringsbeskyttelse og investor-stat tvisteløsning i TTIP – implikasjoner for Norge. Rapportene behandler spørsmålet om eventuell norsk tilknytning til TTIP fra et rettslig perspektiv. Vi peker i den sammenheng på relevante konstitusjonelle problemstillinger norsk deltakelse kan komme i berøring med. Utgangspunktet for vår analyse er at Grunnloven åpner for at Norge påtar seg omfattende folkerettslige forpliktelser. Det viktige er at Stortinget vet hva det gjør og har kontroll med fremtidig utvikling. Derfor er det særlig konkret anvendelse og videreutvikling av traktatforpliktelsene som er interessant å studere nærmere fra et rettslig perspektiv. Slik dynamikk finner sted gjennom regulatorisk samarbeid som leder frem til nye forpliktelser, og ved tvisteløsning – særlig den planlagte investorstat tvisteløsningsmekanismen. Delrapportene er blitt til gjennom samarbeid oss tre imellom. Delrapport I er i hovedsak ført i pennen av Tarjei Bekkedal mens delrapport II i hovedsak er ført i pennen av Ivar Alvik.

• Melchior, Arne; Alvik, Ivar; Bekkedal, Tarjei; Mittenzwei, Klaus; Pettersen, Ivar & Grünfeld, Leo A. [Show all 10 contributors for this article] (2016). TTIP and Norway: Impact and trade policy options. Norsk Utenrikspolitisk Institutt. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  This study analyzes TTIP, its implications for Norway and Norway’s trade policy choices. TTIP will hardly be concluded under Obama's presidency, but the agreement could become a reality within a few years. TTIP aims at comprehensive cooperation in the regulatory area. In the short term there will be limited harmonization of standards but regulatory cooperation between different systems. In the long term, the goal is stronger cooperation in the regulatory area. TTIP will from what we know not lead to a lowering of European health regulations or a "race to the bottom". If TTIP is realized and Norway remains outside, the EEA Agreement will be little affected and the overall economic impact is moderate. If Norway joins TTIP, there will be a significant real income gain, with estimates ranging from 2236 to 6772 NOK per capita in the various scenarios. There is considerable variation across sectors. With Norway outside TTIP there will be a moderate negative impact for a majority of the sectors, especially some manufacturing sectors that face tougher competition in the EU and USA export markets. The oil industry will benefit from increased demand and higher prices. If Norway joins TTIP, a clear majority of industries will benefit; especially business services and a number of other service industries. The public sector gains from TTIP, mainly due to cheaper inputs. TTIP will contribute to the dismantling of import protection for Norwegian agriculture and without compensating measures, production and employment will be reduced. TTIP will still allow some import protection and this margin of maneuver, which depends on future negotiations, is important for the outcome. With a larger margin of manoeuvre and unchanged budgetarty support, most of Norway’s agriculture can be maintained. With less margin of manoeuvre, it will be more challenging. Norwegian accession to TTIP may occur in the form of a standard trade agreement in which Norway or EFTA are formally equal to the EU and the United States. Alternatively, Norway may participate in a European pillar as in today's "Open Skies" agreement on air traffic. If TTIP succeeds in establishing comprehensive regulatory cooperation, the latter solution is most likely. Such a solution implies that Norway will become more closely integrated with the European Union also in trade policy towards third countries. Norwegian entry into TTIP implies that we have to accept the established rules and negotiate bilaterally with the EU and the USA on market access. The negotiations with the USA will apply to all aspects of market access, while negotiations with the EU will apply only to areas in which the EEA agreement is not already deeper. The negotiations with the EU for TTIP entry will thus include, among other issues, tariffs for seafood and agriculture. As an alternative to membership in TTIP, Norway or EFTA may initiate a trade agreement with the USA. Such an agreement would likely be less extensive in the regulatory area. Such an agreement will also provide an economic gain for Norway, but less than accession to TTIP. For Norway as a whole, accession to TTIP creates a real income gain between 12.5 and 35 billion NOK according to various scenarios, while a free trade agreement with the United States results in a gain of about 7.4 billion NOK. TTIP also includes negotiations on so-called Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), whereby foreign-owned companies can sue a state if they are unfairly or inappropriately treated. Such rights also exist in national law but international tribunals have to some extent extended the interpretation of what is considered unfair. The European Union has proposed a solution in TTIP with a permanent court as well as rules that discipline the interpretation of the principles, and thus avoids that ISDS unduly interferes into the states’ "right to regulate". This and many other issues are analysed in this report and six background papers.

View all works in NVA