International Law an der Hochschule Aschaffenburg

It was introduced by the Lisbon Treaty in 2009. It is not a real initiative, it is an invite for the European Citizens to make a proposal to the Commission about things they care about. It does not forcingly to a new legislation but makes the EU more democratic.

-> Art. 11 Nr. 4 TEU

The Commission has a proposal monopoly. (Art. 294 (2) TFEU)

The European Parliament and the Council together are passing the laws. (Art. 289 (1) TFEU)

The reason lies within the principle of conferral (Art. 5 (1) TEU). This principle limits the EU powers. It means that the EU can only act within the competences enacted upon it by the MS in the treaties.

->The functioning of the EU  is based on its treaties. If there isn't a legal basis in the treaties for the EU to act on, the EU can't enact any legislation on that issue. (Art. 2 (1) TFEU.)

It's a legal doctrine / cornerstone principle that resulted from settled case-law of the Court of Justice. The two landmark decisions were "Costa vs. ENEL (C-6/64)" and "Van Gend vs. Loos (C-26/62)". 

The European Court of Justice holds that Community law overrules national law.

The European legal order is on a higher level than the national legal systems of the MS. It can't be overridden by domestic law provisions. The EEC Treaty has its own legal system and became an integral part of the legal systems of the MS which their national courts are bound to apply. With that the MS have limited their sovereign rights and created a body of law which binds both their nationals and themselves. 

The Member States limit their sovereign rights by conferring competences to the EU which therefore gets sovereign itself. The confer of (partial) legislative power enables the EU to adopt its own legislation (secondary union law). Since the European legal order is integrated in the legal systems of the MS they have to accept→ duty of sincere cooperation. (Art. 4 (3) TEU) The EU law combines the interests of all member states, thus it has to be the superior law.
Also Costa vs ENEL:

“law... could not because of its special and original nature, be overridden by domestic legal provision... without being deprived of its character as Community law and without the legal basis of the Community itself being called into question.” 

→ from here you can take the “absurdity” or “logique” argument! 

The Conference recalls that, in accordance with well settled case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Treaties and the law adopted by the Union on the basis of the Treaties have primacy over the law of MS, under the conditions laid down by the said case law. 

The MS in the year 2009 (date of the Treaty of Lisbon) decided that there is no need to integrate the principle into the treaties because the case law is settled and it’s sufficient to have the principle in case law. 

No. Unless specific provisions the regular “offer-acceptance-mechanism” according to Art. 14, 18 CISG applies. The user of “standard terms” has to send them to the buyer or to make them otherwise actively available for the buyer.

1) Proposal sufficiently definite + (2) intention to be bound + (3) effective offer

First look at Art. 8 2,3 for whether or not it is binding.

 Then a proposal which is addressed to an unknown number of people is considered as an “invitation to make offers” (Art. 14 II CISG)

So probably no. 

Yes, Art. 15 2 - has to reach offeror before or at same time than offer though