scholarly journals Asymmetric cross-citations in private law: An empirical study of 28 supreme courts in the EU

Author(s):  
Sabrina D’Andrea ◽  
Nikita Divissenko ◽  
Maria Fanou ◽  
Anna Krisztián ◽  
Jaka Kukavica ◽  
...  

Recent years have seen a growing volume of research on citations between courts from different countries. This article fills a gap in the current literature by presenting and analysing cross-citations between the highest domestic courts responsible for matters of private law in the EU from 2000 to 2018. It addresses two main questions: first, to what extent do judges cite foreign case law in their decisions? Second, what may explain the varying levels of engagement of supreme courts with foreign case law? Our findings offer a mixed result as to the nature and frequency of such cross-citations. Overall, we identify 2984 cross-citations; yet, only in few instances do we find a reciprocal relationship between the supreme courts of two countries, while more generally an asymmetric picture emerges. The article also discusses whether problems with the ease of access to court decisions may partly be responsible for limitations in the use of cross-citations.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabrina D'Andrea ◽  
Nikita Divissenko ◽  
Maria Fanou ◽  
Anna Krisztián ◽  
Jaka Kukavica ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-173
Author(s):  
Micheline McNicoll

An exhaustive review of our case law is required for a proper understanding of municipalities' civil liability for offences and quasi-offences. It appears indeed that there is no other alternative since, on one hand, the legislator is mute on number of important relevant questions and, on the other hand, municipalities, are governed by rules of public law. Our review covering a period of about eighty years, contains an analysis of the three « schools of thought » that succesively exerciced considerable influence upon our court decisions. The different « schools of thought » naturally emerged from the constant opposition of public and private law divided by a boundary line subject to fluctuation.


Author(s):  
Rupert Dunbar

Article 3(5) of the Treaty on the European Union concerns EU external relations and was a new provision of the Lisbon Treaty. It has been seized upon by scholars for its reference to ‘strict observance of international law’ by the EU in its relations with the wider world. However, recent case law in the Court of Justice of the European Union has demonstrated little movement towards this supposed ideal. This article supports the fact that rigid and unquestioning adherence to international law has not emerged in case law, particularly as Article 3(5) TEU also mandates that the Union ‘uphold and promote its values and interests’. By taking a broader view of both the text and context of Article 3(5) TEU in EU law as a whole, and through consideration of the limited demands international law places on domestic courts, the article argues that – contrary to current literature – a more expressly balanced approach towards respect for international law is required and should be nurtured in the case law.


2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 965-983 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esin Küçük

Solidarity, although widely used in EU legislation and the early jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), lacks a clear meaning. It appears as an amorphous concept whose contours change depending on the legal areas and the actors involved, and which generates differing levels of commitment. This article explores the attributes common to the different expressions of solidarity as a binding legal obligation in order to develop European solidarity as an integrated concept. It examines the meaning and boundaries of solidarity by focusing on the reasons that generate solidarity obligations under the EU Treaties and by analysing the case law where the CJEU has drawn on solidarity or could have drawn on it, but decided not to do so. The article concludes that while different aspects of solidarity are embodied in EU legislation, the concept has normative force mainly when it is driven by self-interest in a reciprocal relationship. Although references have been made to its ethical underpinnings, in the absence of a reciprocal return, the normative premises of solidarity have remained weak.


2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Norbert Reich

The paper discusses a new dimension of EU law, namely its impact on private law based on the principle of non-discrimination, thus deliberately going beyond concepts of autonomy and freedom of contract as recognised in all Member States and by the EU itself. Article 21 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights has �constitutionalised� this principle which originally found recognition in several EU directives on employment and consumer law analysed in this paper with a special regard to the growing case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU (ECJ).


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-221
Author(s):  
Marcello Busetto

The essay highlights the influence of the ECtHR case law on Italian criminal procedure in the field of effective assistance of counsel. In particular, attention is paid towards the approach undertaken by domestic courts of directly applying the Strasbourg’s criteria concerning the “quality” of representation. The author points out possible dark areas and problematic aspects of this course, also in the light of the EU legislation.


Author(s):  
Viktória Harsági

AbstractThe present writing is the fifth part of a series entitled “Hungarian Case Law Relating to European Private Law”, which presents the essence of court decisions made since last summer. Similarly to the earlier years, the majority of the cases concern questions of family law, more specifically, questions relating to parental responsibility. Besides three decisions of the Curia (Kúria) relating to this topic, the Curia has delivered its first decision on the European order for payment procedure, which decision will be presented in the present article as the first in order.


2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-124
Author(s):  
Juliane Kokott ◽  
Christoph Sobotta

The enforcement of EU environmental law is of particular relevance because EU law provides most of the framework of environmental law in the Member States, including the UK. Supervision by the EU Commission ensures a certain general standard of compliance, especially as regards transposition of directives and conformity of transposing legislation. The practice of domestic courts is an essential complement to Commission action. In this respect the Luxembourg jurisprudence has in particular strengthened the judicial powers of UK courts and provided some protection against excessive costs of judicial proceedings. After brexit much of this contribution could continue to be relevant, in particular if the agreement that was negotiated with the EU should be ratified.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document