scholarly journals The Influence of European Initiatives in National Courts—The Case of the Spanish Supreme Court

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. Christopher-Vajda
Author(s):  
Christopher Vajda

Following the expiry on 31 December 2020 of the ‘transition period’ under the UK/EU Withdrawal Agreement, the relationship between UK and EU law had changed. Whilst much EU legislation at that date will continue to apply in UK law as ‘retained EU law’ and judgments of the EU courts handed down before that date will remain binding on UK courts as ‘retained EU case law’, the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court can depart from that case law. Whilst EU court judgments handed down after that date are not binding on UK courts, they may be taken into account. This article considers both the status of EU retained case law and when the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal may depart from it, and the future of EU law that is not ‘retained EU case law’ and how judgments of the European Courts and national courts of its Member States may influence UK judges in the future.


2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
pp. 1095-1106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah L. Buxbaum

In its most recent term, the United States Supreme Court heard a case arising out of the activities of a price-fixing cartel in the vitamins market. The defendants were a number of major international pharmaceuticals companies, including F. Hoffman-LaRoche, Rhone-Poulenc, Daiichi Pharmaceutical, and BASF, that had fixed prices for bulk vitamins and vitamin pre-mixes in markets around the world. The cartel, which has been described as “probably the most economically damaging cartel ever prosecuted under U.S. antitrust law,” is estimated to have affected over $5 billion of commerce worldwide. Previous proceedings against the participants in the cartel, initiated in Australia, Canada and the European Union as well as in the United States, included administrative investigations and criminal prosecutions of individual executives. In these various proceedings, the cartel participants were found to have violated antitrust laws in the United States and elsewhere, and were subjected to heavy – indeed, record – fines in many countries. By all accounts, the countries engaged in investigating and then prosecuting the cartel participants did so in full cooperation with each other. In particular, they made use of the mutual assistance and information sharing agreements that have become an important component of coordinated international antitrust enforcement.


2016 ◽  
Vol 75 (3) ◽  
pp. 452-455
Author(s):  
Oliver Michael Butler

THE image of King Canute trying to hold back the tide is a popular one used to critique attempts by national courts to restrain the publication of private information in the face of a global and online media. The truth, or at least the allegation, will out. The issue is certainly not a new one. The futility of an injunction in England and Wales, given extensive publication out of the jurisdiction, played a key role in the Spycatcher litigation in the late 1980s. Such futility is a feature of confidentiality or secrecy: the tide of information cannot be held back in an information age. In PJS v News Group Newspapers [2016] UKSC 26, the Supreme Court, endorsing an approach developed by the High Court in several earlier authorities, distinguished between protecting confidentiality and preventing intrusion as twin rationales for the tort of misuse of private information. The intrusion of a pending media storm in the jurisdiction, repeating allegations already widely available, was a further misuse of private information and could usefully be restrained in England and Wales. Even where confidentiality had already been lost, privacy injunctions could continue to play a useful role as a defence against the significant additional intrusion, at least where it could be practicably restrained, and the pending media storm that would accompany a lifting of the injunction represented one such case.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 12-35
Author(s):  
Julia Laffranque

Judicial systems often wrestle with whether to sacrifice always presenting thorough judicial reasoning for the sake of an effective leave-to-appeal system. The paper outlines issues of reference to the Luxembourg Court, particularly with regard to Estonian circumstances in light of the ECtHR judgment in Baydar v. the Netherlands. The interplay between EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights in this regard is considered first, along with the importance of giving reasons, courts’ authority, the different roles of domestic and European courts, the duty of referring questions to the CJEU and exemption, consequences of non-referral in EU law, the Strasbourg Court’s role in dialogue between national courts and the CJEU, etc. Examined next are such matters as influences on preliminary references in European Union law, summary reasoning and limits to the reasoning duty (especially with regard to the Ullens de Schooten case of the ECtHR), associated division of competencies between the Strasbourg and Luxembourg courts, and finally the reasoning of the ECtHR itself as good or bad example. The author then considers the Supreme Court of Estonia’s leave-to-appeal system and the national courts’ practice in relation to Baydar, concluding that, while reasoned judgments are important and a right, no right exists for the applicant’s case to be referred by a domestic judge to the Luxembourg Court, though it is vital that summary judgment not be arbitrary / manifestly unreasonable; that Estonian courts have made reasonable use of the preliminary reference procedure before the Luxembourg Court thus far; and that they should articulate well the reasoning for referral/non-referral for litigants. The author proposes that the Estonian Supreme Court explain, exceptionally in one refusal of leave to appeal (cf. the Netherlands), that the general requirements for granting leave to appeal cover also the situation of preliminary questions to the CJEU and C.I.L.F.I.T. arguments of the CJEU. Above all, neither the interplay between EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights nor the role of national courts finding their way in complex legal surroundings should be neglected. 


Author(s):  
Federica Casarosa ◽  
Dianora Poletti

The right to be forgotten has come to the forefront of the academic debate as a reaction to Court of Justice's decision in case C-507/17 Google LLC c. CNIL concerning the issue of geographical extension of the delisting obligation. Along with the development of CJEU jurisprudence, national courts have developed their own caselaw interpreting and adapting the right to be forgotten, now included in art 17 of the General Data Protection Regulation, to the pre-existing legal framework. Italian courts, and in particular the Italian Supreme Court, have addressed in several occasions the features and facets of the right to be forgotten, and the recent decision of the Grand Chamber (n. 19681, 22 July 2019) is the last though not the least. Starting form this decision, the chapter will analyse how the Supreme Court has attempted to systematise the right to be forgotten distinguishing what is called the traditional application of the right from the ones emerging in the digital context.


Author(s):  
Vasyl Nepyivoda ◽  
Ivanna Nepyivoda

The Ukrainian legislation does not apply the term «precedent». It is understandable for the legal system of the Romano-Germanic family. However, judicial precedents serve as de facto source of Ukrainian law. Activities of the highest judicial institutions, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the Supreme Court, providing guidelines on application of particular legal rules are principal contributors for this state of affairs. The paper provides an overview of such activities in order to evaluate the process and its prospects. Covering the ECtHR activities, it is noted that the key elements of precedent law, such as application of stare decisis doctrine, ratio decidendi and obiter dictum components in decisions, are available there. Ukrainian courts are obliged by the statutes to apply ECtHR judgements and decisions in their own cases. Hence, the judicial precedents created by the ECtHR are the source of Ukrainian law. This discussion is followed by an analysis of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine decisions. It is concluded that been interpretative precedents they serve as a source of law as well. The third institution under examination, the Supreme Court, is empowered, inter alia, to formulate in its rulings guidelines for the application of law in a variety of situations. Since such rules are binding on the courts and other authorities, they have inherent features of the precedents and should be considered as a source of law. The article summarizes that Ukraine falls within the continental Europe’s general trend. It implies the significant growth of the role of the European and national courts as a rule-making institutions resulting in reinforcement of the precedent as a source of law and its formalization in terms of the civil law jurisdictions. In general, such process allowing prompt adaptation to the contemporary realities is positive. To facilitate it, the term «precedent» have to be introduced into the practical area. In particular, the role of judicial precedent as a source of law should be reflected in the Ukrainian procedural legislation.


Author(s):  
Gérard V. La Forest

SummaryThe rapid globalization that marks our era has resulted in increasing demands for the legal resolution of disputes arising out of interstate activities. National courts throughout the world have been significantly affected by this development. This article describes the recent expansion of the work of the Supreme Court of Canada in relation to transnational legal issues, including issues of public and private international law, human rights, admiralty law, and issues of private law having international ramifications. It traces the Court's evolving approach to international law issues and its willingness to reformulate its principles to meet modern conditions and to foster compliance with its norms. The more cosmopolitan attitude thereby generated has worked in concert with the Court's increasing willingness to rely on comparative law techniques in assuting in the resolution of issues of a localized character.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 452-475
Author(s):  
Xabier Arzoz ◽  
Markku Suksi

The judicial resolution of claims of self-determination by national courts is still exceptional, but rulings seem to be increasing. This paper aims to compare the adjudication of claims of self-determination by constitutional or supreme courts. It will look at three judicial pronouncements from three jurisdictions: the Judgment of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation concerning the sovereignty of Tatarstan (1992), the Opinion of the Canadian Supreme Court concerning the secession of Quebec (1998), and the Judgment of the Spanish Constitutional Court concerning the declaration of sovereignty of the Parliament of Catalonia (2014). The paper will draw parallels in the way constitutional or supreme courts have tackled the tension between democracy and constitutionalism.


2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten Sandberg

National courts have a central role to play in the implementation of children’s rights. In this article, decisions of the Norwegian Supreme court in criminal cases and immigration cases are discussed. They shed interesting light on issues under article 3, such as whether the courts should base their judgment on the present facts, the balancing of the child’s best interests against other considerations, and whether article 3 is self-executing and justiciable. The consequences of a child not being heard are considered. Criminal and immigration cases both contain strong societal interests, but the willingness to give priority to children’s rights seems to differ in the two areas.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document