Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
\function of the european court of justice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: \function of the european court of justice
Member state governments of the European Community began with a fundamental role in making EC policies and standards; but throughout the 1960s and 1970s the European Court of Justice gradually began to expand its role and developed an unprecedented regime comparable to the constitutional order of a federal state. The ECJ permitted itself to decide on matters traditionally considered to be the exclusive competence of member states; including social policy, gender equality and competition policy. Remarkably, the majority of national courts and governments of the member states have conformed to ECJ rulings and have harmoniously surrendered their jurisdiction over key policy areas – deferring to the ECJ’s authority. Consequently, the member states have struggled to enjoy international legal latitude of compliance in their relationship with the ECJ and commentators such as Weiler J.A have labelled the process a “quiet revolution. ”
It is necessary to address the means and opportunities the Court of Justice employed in order to inaugurate itself as a superior court to that of the members’. In pursuance of this objective, it should be borne in mind whether member states desired ECJ supremacy and thus voluntarily handed the ECJ their competences; or whether a “competence creep” materialised, gradually increasing the superiority of the ECJ. The answer is not easily deciphered; ample EU scholars have proposed explanations for the apparent gift of superiority. ‘Neo-functionalists’ notably argue that the early choice of national governments to place determined areas within the power of European institutions produced pressure to extend the powers of these institutions to further policy areas. The phrase ‘functional spill-over’ was coined by ...
... middle of paper ...
...man, and Heiner Schulz. 1998. The European Court of Justice,
National Governments, and Legal Integration in the European Union. International Organization 52 (1):292
Neill Nugent. 2006. The Government and Politics of the European Union, Sixth Edition. Durham:
Duke University Press: 292.
Nugent [2006] 291
Weiler, J.A. (1994) ‘A Quiet Revolution: The European Court of Justice and its Interlocutors’
Mark A. Pollack. 2005. Theorizing EU Policy-Making. In Policy-Making in the European Union, 5th edition, edited by Helen Wallace, William Wallace, and Mark A. Pollack. Oxford: Oxford University
Press: 15.
Andrew Moravscik. April 2005. The European Constitutional Compromise and the Neofunctionalist
Legacy. Journal of European Public Policy 12 (2): 350.
Martha Finnemore. 1996. National Interests in International Society. Ithaca: Cornell University Press: 5.
Sedelmeier, Ulrich. ‘Is europeanisation through conditionality sustainable?: lock-in of institutional change after EU accession’ West European politics, 35(1), 2012, 20-38
Witte, Mark Dawson and Floris de. "Constitutional Balance in the EU after the Euro-Crisis." The Modern Law Review (2013): 817-844. Academic Search Complete.
The case of Van Gend en Loos (1963)[3] was the first in a long line of
On May 25, 1993, U.N. Security Council Resolution 827 established an international tribunal charged with prosecuting violations of international law arising from the armed conflicts in the former Yugoslavia. Not since the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials, following World War II has an international court tried individuals accused of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide. The International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTFY), which was established at The Hague, Netherlands, is widely seen as an important step toward the deterrence of crimes, the establishment of the firm rule of international law, and the promotion of world peace. Yet, from its inception, the tribunal has generated controversy among supporters and detractors. Among those who believe that the tribunal idea is sound, the principal concerns are that such an institution be established on a sound legal basis, that it adhere to an acceptably high standard of due process, that it administer equal and dispassionate justice, and that it be perceived by nations and individuals to be legitimate, fair and effective. Unfortunately, the Yugoslavia tribunal has not yet met all these standards--and may never be able to meet all of them in the fullest sense. A discussion of some of the realities that face the ICTFY demonstrates why the task of making the tribunal work is so difficult--and why it is vital that it be accomplished.
Although there were numerous movements in promoting the unity of the European, but it seems to have failed. Robertson indicates the unity principle’s outcome is less than what is desired. Thereby, as Murat notes, the court will invariably grant a leeway to the state in deciding the cases namely, the ‘Margin of appreciation’. This maxim owes it genesis from a French term ‘marge d’ appreciation’ that deemed as a doctrine which gives way to a state’s discretion in their governance.
...ifferent story of the EU that has not been focused on in other books or papers. This original, unbiased approach allows the reader to put the EU in a historical perspective that also helps understanding at least the changing forces. In addition, it seems that the author wants to make the public or his audience comfortable with the idea of uncertainty that has been affecting the EU. His second part shows how the current shape was not only the result of political or economic reasons, but also a response of a changing external environment. Moreover, the idea of purgatory as well as the philosophical references and analogies gives the book an exciting, unique demission that links politics, history, and philosophy. However, it would be interesting if the author has included technical analysis and incorporated political science theories to draw policy recommendations.
The Constitutionalisation of the Treaties by the European Court of Justice Introduction = == == == ==
Thomassen, J. 2009. The Legitimacy of the European Union after Enlargement. In: Thomassen, J. Eds. The Legitimacy of the European Union after Enlargement. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 67-86.
Tiilikainen, T. 2011. The empowered European Parliament: Accommodation to the new functions provided by the Lisbon Treaty. The Finnish Institute of International Affairs.
Simmonds C., ‘Paramountcy and the ECHR: a conflict resolved? [2012] Cambridge Law Journal Vol. 71 Issue 3, 498-201
The most significant and challenge to the traditional view of parliamentary sovereignty was Britain’s membership of the European Community in 1972. The European Communities Act 1972 brought with it the requirement that European Law be given priority over domestic courts over conflicting issues of national law. This notion was a direct affront to parliamentary sovereignty, which required that if a later statute, contradicted and earlier statute, which sought to incorporate European Law into English Law, then the later statute should impliedly repeal the earlier statute. Therefore the European Communities act imposed a substantive limit on the legislative ability of subsequent Parliaments.
Forgue, D.G., Kehoskie, N.S. 2007. ‘Enlargement Fatigue in the European Union’. International Law News. Vol 36 (2). Spring 2007. Pp 1-2.
The lack of automatic international compulsory jurisdiction renders ICJ inferior. Therefore the argument that referring to this court as the ‘World Court’ implies it is superior; an international equivalent of a national supreme court is null and void. Generally a supreme court is the highest ranking court. Its ruling is not subject to further review and therefore the disputing parties ha...
It is therefore no longer is it credible for a state to turn its back on international law, alleging a bias towards European values and influence. All that humankind now requires to bring about the elusive, but eternal, dream of perpetual peace is a global citizenship based on a strong commitment to principles of equity and democracy grounded in civil society.
Because it could be quite complicated to look at the EU model from a point of classical democratic nation-state, it seems to be reasonable to discuss this problem, not by abstract reasoning, but by focusing on a concrete case. European Union is the best case available, which in recent decades has developed into a new type of political system with enormous consequences on democracy and governance in its member states. Despite repeated attempts for major institutional reforms, this system is likely to persist in its basic structures for the future and is unlikely to develop into a federal state or to disintegrate into a classic international organization. The present state of democracy and governance in the EU is therefore worth to be analyzed, as it is not a mere transitory state.