Justiciability, Doctrine and Deference: Political Questions Before the U.S. Supreme Court and Private Applicant Standing Before the European Court of Justice

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abby Semple
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The U.S

Judges and Policy Making Authority in the United States and the European Union

ICL Journal ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonios E. Kouroutakis
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Judicial Activism ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court

AbstractInstitutions such as the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Justice in due time have developed a status of supremacy through judicial activism. The main target of the article is to identify the judicial activism exercised by these Courts and to reason its need in the legal order. In the first part the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Justice are placed in the overall polity that they belong to and the development of their status and their characteristics are analyzed. The major concern of the first part is to examine how those declared their supremacy and focus on major cases and their reason­ing.In the second part the extent of the judicial supremacy in each legal order is discussed and its effects in the decision making process are examined. The assumption that judicial activ­ism is acceptable only if it expresses consensus in the legal order is tested and it is argued that up to an extent, Judicial Activism does not distort the political agenda when it ex­presses the consensus of the legal system. Finally, it is argued that when such activism exceeds the boundaries of the consensus, the other actors in the legal system would even­tually react and would limit such activism.

A Need for Change: The Romanian Supreme Court's Approach to 'Appeals in the Interest of Law'

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 293-305
Author(s):  
Norel Neagu
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
First Century ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Strict Interpretation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions

AbstractThis article deals with the possibility of changing the approach to appeals in the interest of law in Romania according to the relevant guidelines extracted from the case law of the European Court of Justice. It provides a comparative analysis of Romanian Supreme Court decisions with those of the European Court of Justice with respect to guiding principles versus a strict interpretation of written legislation. The author highlights a modern path for the Romanian Court to follow in light of the requirements of the twenty-first century.

The Interpretation of Article 30 of the EC Treaty and the “Dormant” Commerce Clause by the European Court of Justice and the US Supreme Court

1999 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georg Haibach
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Commerce Clause ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Ec Law

There are numerous publications on the interpretation of Article 30 of the EC Treaty by the European Court of Justice1 which for the last 20 years has been one of the most controversial issues in EC law. It is, however, surprising that there is much older, yet strikingly similar, case law of the US Supreme Court which has remained almost unnoticed in Europe. In this article the respective case law of the two courts will be compared. Such a comparison is not only of interest as such, but can also contribute to the discussion about the correct scope of Article 30—which has certainly not yet been exhausted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document