The Impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union on Neighbouring Countries

The concluding chapter sums up the overall findings of the project through three different strands of analysis: the first breaks down the eleven jurisdictions into three groups based on the relative quantity and impact of Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) citations found in these jurisdictions. By drawing conclusions from all the country reports through a comparative and macro-perspective, the goal is to distil the insights of the entire project and formulate policy recommendations in the light of EU external policy and legal integration objectives vis-à-vis its neighbourhood; the second examines the many factors that a priori could have an impact on whether judges are likely to cite the CJEU in their judgments, and then discusses what the research has found in relation to the actual role played by these factors; the third tries to place the current project into the context of overall research on the global reach of EU law, which can be ‘exported’ to non-members of the EU through various mechanisms, such as mutual and formal agreement or through more unilateral and spontaneous forms. They include modes of extraterritorial application of EU law, territorial extension, and the so-called ‘Brussels Effect’. The chapter concludes with some general observations and thoughts and formulates possible policy recommendations.

The Impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the Russian Legal System

This chapter presents the findings of the author on the impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the Russian legal system. To start with, this chapter includes a brief description of the background to the modern Russian legal system and, in particular, the structure of the Russian judiciary. The contribution goes on to describe the Russian model for approximating its legal order with EU rules and standards, as well as adding some remarks on the application of EU law by the Russian courts. Then follows an explanation of the specifics of the database used, together with a description and analysis of citation of CJEU decisions by Russian courts in the period 2006–18. Conclusions and recommendations are presented in the final section of the chapter.

The Impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the Turkish Legal System

This chapter explores whether the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) produces any impact on the Turkish legal system and, if so, its possible underlying causes. Protection of intellectual, industrial, and commercial property rights, competition, trade defence instruments, government procurement, direct and indirect taxation have been regarded as the main areas of ‘approximation of legislation’. Accordingly, laws adopted mostly in the past three decades show that the influence of EU law is valid only in certain fields of law, such as intellectual property law, labour law, and competition law, and this is also where we find most CJEU citations. This influence forms part of the EU accession process, which requires Turkey to harmonize its laws with the acquis. According to the research, despite the existence of a long-standing accession process and legislation based on the acquis in certain fields of law, on the whole, the Turkish judiciary does not seem committed to follow EU law in general or CJEU jurisprudence in particular.

The Impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the Georgian Legal System

This chapter scrutinizes perception of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) by the Georgian courts and the Georgian Competition Agency. With the conclusion of the Association Agreement between the EU and Georgia in 2014, the Georgian legal system undoubtedly became more closely connected with EU law. Hence, approximation commitments under the Association Agreement made the case law of the CJEU of much more relevance for the Georgian courts and administrative authorities. However, in the wake of intensification of EU–Georgia relations, the impact of CJEU case law can be identified even in the time before conclusion of the Association Agreement. Analysis shows that several factors play a role with regard to the extent and frequency of mentioning CJEU case law in the decisions of the Georgian courts and Competition Agency. Judges refer to case law of the CJEU with the aim of either strengthening their own arguments or using it as a source of interpretation. Taking into consideration the ‘European’ roots of Georgia’s competition policy, the Competition Agency regards the case law of the CJEU as having a very important interpretative value for closing ‘gaps’ in the law.

The Impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the Legal System of Ukraine

This contribution looks at the application of EU case law by the Ukrainian judiciary in the course of implementation of the EU–Ukraine Association Agreement, which triggered unprecedented political, economic, and legal reforms in Ukraine. Several issues form the focus of consideration in the chapter. The first issue is the evolution of EU–Ukraine relations and reform of the Ukrainian legal system and judiciary in the course of the ‘Europeanization’ of Ukraine since its independence in 1991. The second issue is effective implementation and application of the EU–Ukraine Association Agreement within the Ukrainian legal order and its compatibility with the Ukrainian Constitution. The latest political and legal developments in Ukraine are analysed through the prism of effective implementation of the EU–Ukraine Association Agreement and the rise of pro-European reforms of the Ukrainian judiciary since the ‘Maidan Revolution’/‘Revolution of Dignity’ in 2014. In conclusion, it is argued that the EU–Ukraine Association Agreement enhanced the adaptability of the national constitutional order to the European integration project and reinvigorated judicial activism by Ukrainian judges to refer to the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).

The External Influence of the Court of Justice of the European Union

This chapter explores aspects of Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) case law that highlight the role that this Court has played in enhancing the global reach of EU law and the influence of its own judgments abroad. It addresses two main themes. The first theme is concerned with the CJEU’s contribution in shaping the institutional arrangements established by international agreements concluded by the EU with its neighbouring countries, particularly as regards the role carved out for the CJEU within them. The CJEU has succeeded in enhancing its own role and interpretative authority within the framework of these agreements. The chapter argues that the CJEU has emerged as an agent of its own authority by jealously guarding its interpretative supremacy, as well as the autonomy of EU law. The second theme is concerned with CJEU case law addressing ‘global reach’ EU law. This includes EU law which is extraterritorial, or which gives rise to territorial extension. It also covers EU legislation, which serves as a catalyst for the ‘Brussels Effect’. It is argued that the CJEU has enhanced the external influence of EU law by interpreting broadly and upholding the lawfulness of global reach EU law. Taken together, these two themes exemplify the ways in which EU law, including CJEU judgments, can have influence in third countries. This analysis contributes to our understanding of why some judgments issued by the CJEU have proved to be particularly influential in third countries, as exemplified by the various chapters included in this volume.

The Impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the Israeli Legal System

This chapter presents the findings of the author on the impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the Israeli legal system. After a short description of the Israeli legal system and its judiciary, including figures on the use of foreign legal sources by the courts, the chapter describes briefly the relations between the EU and Israel and notes the weak legal approximation provision in the Association Agreement. Despite the lack of obligation on Israel’s part to rely on CJEU judgments, the author has found steadily growing numbers of citations of these judgments by various Israeli courts and tribunals. The chapter presents the statistics of these citations over the years, the types of tribunals that cite the CJEU, and the fields of law where these citations are mostly found (mainly in trade marks, competition law, and labour law). It also lists the CJEU cases that are most cited by Israeli tribunals. It then assesses the impact of the citations by a coding system that allows us to observe the relative influence that the citations had in the various tribunals. After having presented a statistic overview on the citation patterns, the chapter zooms into some specific cases where the CJEU was cited in order to put the citation into context and better understand its significance. Finally, the chapter discusses instances of CJEU impact on Israeli regulation, not case law, namely in the field of competition law, sports (the Bosman case), and privacy (‘the right to be forgotten’).

The Impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union on Azerbaijan

The relationship between the EU and Azerbaijan is ambivalent: strong economic cooperation, membership in the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), on the one hand, and differences with regard to human rights issues and tough negotiations on a new Cooperation Agreement, on the other hand. However, many facts are in favour of strong impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) jurisprudence on Azerbaijan. Despite all the tensions, Azerbaijan consistently developed its legal system based on the European, especially German, model. European law is a mandatory course in the largest law faculty of the country. Azerbaijan has positive experience with the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which plays an important role in the development of the legal and court systems of the country. The chapter shows that despite the favourable circumstances, the impact of the CJEU jurisprudence on Azerbaijan remains very limited. It analyses three decisions of the Constitutional Court referencing to CJEU jurisprudence. Furthermore, the author tries to identify the reasons for this by analysing the legal and courts systems, as well as the legal education, and comes up with several proposals on how to make the CJEU jurisprudence more fruitful for Azerbaijan, but also for other neighbouring jurisdictions.

The Court of Justice of the European Union and the Armenian Legal Order

The chapter analyses the limited impact of Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) case law on the legal order of the Republic of Armenia. Despite Armenia’s geographic proximity to the EU, CJEU precedents feature in only two cases of the Constitutional Court of Armenia. In both cases, CJEU case law is seen merely as part of comparative international legal practice, informing the judgment of the national court, rather than affecting the ratio per se. The chapter analyses the main reasons behind the apparent lack of CJEU impact on Armenian judicial practice and the legal order more generally. These include, for example, low intensity in bilateral relations between the EU and Armenia and cognitive barriers. The chapter also addresses the main features of the Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement and covers future possibilities for judicial interaction between the two legal orders.

CJEU Citations in the Case Law of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court

This chapter addresses the issue of when, why, and to what effect the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (FSC) refers to the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). After providing background information on the Swiss legal system and the relations between Switzerland and the EU, it presents the doctrines of ‘euro-compatible’ interpretation developed by the FSC. Based on a comprehensive analysis of published FSC decisions, it then examines the frequency of references to the CJEU, their legal rationale, and their impact. The article finds that citations of the CJEU in Swiss case law are much more frequent and cogent than in the other third states covered by the present book. This, it is argued, is due to the far-reaching Europeanization of Swiss law. Indeed, while cultural factors may influence the decision to cite CJEU precedents in individual cases, the degree and type of Europeanization in each legal field predict the frequency and cogency of such citations. Thus, in the Swiss case, it may be misleading to speak of the ‘influence of the CJEU’. More than inter-judicial dynamics, it is Swiss judges’ everyday office of applying the law that leads them to consider CJEU precedent.