DOCSLIB.ORG

Papers from the Colloquium on the Judicial Architecture of the European

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Papers from the Colloquium on the Judicial Architecture of the European PAPERS FROM THE COLLOQUIUM ON THE JUDICIAL ARCHITECTURE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION 15 NOVEMBER 2004 CONTENT Address by the President of the Court of Justice .................................................................................... 3 Topic 1 : “The role of the Court of Justice, Court of First Instance and specialised tribunals in the long- term” ........................................................................................................................................................ 9 Prof Koen Lenaerts .......................................................................................................................... 10 Michel Petite..................................................................................................................................... 17 Ingolf Pernice ................................................................................................................................... 20 James Flynn, QC.............................................................................................................................. 26 Topic 2 : “What do the national judges and parties in the national courts require of the European Courts in order to enforce Community law effectively, and where are these needs not being met?”... 29 Leif Sevón......................................................................................................................................... 30 The Hon Ms. Justice Mary Finlay Geoghegan................................................................................. 33 Berend Jan Drijber ........................................................................................................................... 35 Address by the President of the Court of First Instance........................................................................ 37 Topic 3 : “What do the parties to direct actions require of the Community Courts, and where are these needs not being met?”........................................................................................................................... 42 Anthony Arnull .................................................................................................................................. 43 Georg Berrisch ................................................................................................................................. 49 Alexander von Mühlendahl............................................................................................................... 54 Nicholas Forwood............................................................................................................................. 57 Topic 4 : “Practical and political constraints on the functioning of the Courts”...................................... 59 Giorgio Maganza .............................................................................................................................. 60 General Paper ....................................................................................................................................... 61 Francis Jacobs ................................................................................................................................. 62 Participants List ..................................................................................................................................... 70 Colloquium on the Judicial Architecture of the European Union 15 November 2004 - 2 - ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE Vassilios SKOURIS THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE AFTER ENLARGEMENT: Current trends and future challenges A) INTRODUCTION First of all, I would like to thank the Council of the Bars and Law Societies of the European Union for their kind invitation to participate in this colloquium and deliver an address before such a distinguished audience. We are here today to discuss the future of the judicial architecture of the European Union, a subject which is of particular interest after the recent enlargement and in view of the future entry into force of the European Constitution signed last week in Rome. My intervention today simply being an opening address, I do not wish to enter into details. Therefore, I opted for a more general presentation of the Court’s current state of affairs as regards its internal organisation and working methods, in order to provide a reference point for our discussions. As some of you may already know, during the last 18 months, the European Court of Justice has undergone a number of very significant changes and has been preparing to face some of the greatest challenges in its 52-year history. These changes came mainly as a result of three events: first, the entry into force of the Treaty of Nice and the amendments it introduced to the Statute of the Court, second, the enlargement of the European Union and, third, the decision, by the Court itself, to adopt certain measures that would improve the efficiency of its working methods. Hence, I considered it useful to devote the main part of my presentation to these developments in order to point out the context in which the Court is facing the reality of an enlarged Europe and the perspective of the entry into force of the European Constitution. B) THE INNOVATIONS INTRODUCED BY THE TREATY OF NICE Allow me to start with the Treaty of Nice, which entered into force on the 1st of February 2003. The Treaty of Nice was characterised by three key innovations with regard to the organisation and internal functioning of the Court. The first one was the introduction of the Grand Chamber. Comprised of 13 judges [(the President of the Court, the 3 Presidents of the Chambers of 5 judges and 9 other judges (by rotation)] the Grand Chamber is now essentially the formation that hears the cases that are considered most important. Following the enlargement, the Full Court, now composed of up to 25 judges, will most probably sit on rare occasions, although that still remains to be seen. In that respect, one has to take into account that the Court has been developing its case-law for approximately 52 years. Consequently, legal issues likely to justify a formation of 25 judges will not be occurring very frequently. The second major innovation introduced by the Nice Treaty was the election of the Presidents of the Chambers of 5 judges for 3 years. In addition, the Presidents of the Chambers of 5 judges necessarily sit, along with the President of the Court, on all the cases brought before the Grand Chamber and on all the cases pending before their respective Chambers. The period of time for which they are elected and the number of cases they sit on confer on the Presidents of these Chambers a very important institutional role within the Court, especially with regard to the coherence and uniformity of the case- law. The third innovation of the Treaty of Nice I would like to discuss today concerns the role of the Advocate General. As you probably know, although the Treaty of Nice maintained the principle “one judge per Member State”, it did not provide for an increase in the number of Advocates General. Therefore, notwithstanding the enlargement of the European Union, there are still only 8 Advocates General serving at the Court. Taking into account that the recent enlargement will eventually lead to a surge of incoming cases, there was a risk of considerable procedural delays due to a potential dramatic increase of the Advocates’ General workload. For that reason, the Treaty of Nice introduced for the first time the possibility for the Court to render judgments without an opinion from the Advocate General on cases where no new points of law are raised. If one also considers the well-established practice of responding to certain requests for a preliminary ruling by way of a simple order (and therefore without an opinion by the Advocate General), one cannot help but notice an important change in the institutional role of the Advocate general. Regardless of how these possibilities will be applied in practice, one can safely predict that Advocates General will be presenting opinions on less cases and, consequently, will concentrate on the more important cases brought before the Court. C) THE ENLARGEMENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION: preparatory measures related to the linguistic aspects The Treaty of Nice amendments concerning the Court were of course introduced in view of the enlargement of the European Union. However, it was clear to us from the outset that these innovations would not be sufficient in order to deal with all the consequences of the enlargement. Therefore, the different divisions of the Court started preparing for it as early as 2 years before the 1st of May 2004. Presenting to you all the measures taken by the Court in view of the enlargement would certainly be superfluous for the purposes of our discussion. Hence, I will focus on the linguistic aspects which I believe are of particular importance. Pursuant to the enlargement, it is now possible to bring proceedings before the Court in 20 languages. All judgments and opinions of Advocates General must be translated in all 20 languages. It is apparent that managing this multilingualism is not a simple task especially since it entails the risk of procedural delays. The Court has devoted considerable thought to this problem and it has taken a number of measures destined to limit delays due to translation. To be more precise: ¾ Lawyer-linguists from the Court’s translation service have started taking intensive language courses in the 9 new languages
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Présentation Des Intervenants Line-Up of the Speakers
    Présentation des intervenants Line-up of the speakers Koen Lenaerts President of the Court of justice of the European Union, Professor at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven President Koen Lenaerts holds a Ph.D. in Law (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven), a Master’s in Law and a Master’s in Public Administration (Harvard University). He has been a Professor of European Law at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven since 1983. Previously, he was a Professor at the College of Europe, Bruges (1984-89) and a lawyer in private practice at the Brussels Bar (1986-89), as well as a Visiting Professor at the Harvard Law School (1989). He was a Judge at the Court of First Instance of the European Communities (now the General Court), from 25 September 1989 to 6 October 2003. He has been a Judge at the Court of Justice since 7 October 2003, serving as Vice- President from 9 October 2012 to 7 October 2015 and as President since 8 October 2015. Antoine Bailleux Professeur à l'Université Saint-Louis - Bruxelles, Avocat au Barreau de Bruxelles, directeur de l'Institut d'études européennes (USL-B) Prof. Antoine Bailleux is a professor of EU law and legal theory at Saint-Louis University, Brussels and a member of the Brussels Bar. He is the chief editor of the Revue interdisciplinaire d’études juridiques - Droit en contexte and a director of the Institute for European Studies (USL-B) and the Séminaire interdisciplinaire d’études juridiques. In the field of EU law, his main areas of interest are fundamental rights, free movement, institutional law and competition law.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Visit to NUI Galway 4-6 March, 2019 Welcoming the Supreme Court to NUI Galway
    Supreme Court Visit to NUI Galway 4-6 March, 2019 Welcoming the Supreme Court to NUI Galway 4-6 March, 2019 Table of Contents Welcome from the Head of School . 2 Te School of Law at NUI Galway . 4 Te Supreme Court of Ireland . 6 Te Judges of the Supreme Court . 8 2 Welcome from the Head of School We are greatly honoured to host the historic sittings of the Irish Supreme Court at NUI Galway this spring. Tis is the frst time that the Supreme Court will sit outside of a courthouse since the Four Courts reopened in 1932, the frst time the court sits in Galway, and only its third time to sit outside of Dublin. To mark the importance of this occasion, we are running a series of events on campus for the public and for our students. I would like to thank the Chief Justice and members of the Supreme Court for participating in these events and for giving their time so generously. Dr Charles O’Mahony, Head of School, NUI Galway We are particularly grateful for the Supreme Court’s willingness to engage with our students. As one of Ireland’s leading Law Schools, our key focus is on the development of both critical thinking and adaptability in our future legal professionals. Tis includes the ability to engage in depth with the new legal challenges arising from social change, and to analyse and apply the law to developing legal problems. Te Supreme Court’s participation in student seminars on a wide range of current legal issues is not only deeply exciting for our students, but ofers them an excellent opportunity to appreciate at frst hand the importance of rigorous legal analysis, and the balance between 3 necessary judicial creativity and maintaining the rule of law.
    [Show full text]
  • Best of Concurrences 2020 Articles
    English Edition 2020 Concurrences REVUE DES DROITS DE LA CONCURRENCE | COMPETITION LAW REVIEW Ce signe indique un article publié dans le supplément électronique Forewords Articles de la revue disponible sur Should digital antitrust be ordo‑liberal? Mobile telecommunications mergers in the EU – Alexandre de Streel, N° 1-2020 Remedies revisited Concurrences Bernd Langeheine, Beatriz Martos Stevenson, Jan www.concurrences.com Politics, digital innovation, intellectual property Przerwa, N° 1-2020 and the future of competition law Accessible sur abonnement Josef Drexl, N° 4-2019 Antitrust and the clash of sovereigns – Bringing under one roof: Extraterritoriality, industrial policy, foreign sovereign compulsion, and (bad) applications of law against “my country’s” firms Interviews Eleanor M. Fox, N° 4-2019 Dirk MIDDELSCHULTE (Unilever): How purpose‑driven business charms a competition practitioner N° 1-2020 International Marina TAVASSI (Milan Court of Appeal): Belgium: The new Book IV of the Code of Economic The development of private enforcement in Italy – Law – Dotting the i’s and crossing The experience of a specialised judge the t’s in competition law rules N° 4-2019 Caroline Cauffman, N° 1-2020 Brexit: Balancing UK and EU merger control Joel Bamford, Aiste Slezeviciute, N° 4-2019 On-Topics Digital & competition Paul Belleflamme, Martin Peitz et al. N° 1-2020 Legal practices Limitation periods in competition law damages Banking and Big Data actions in the EU: Are further clarification Adam Land, Bill Roberts, Stefano Trento, Jorge and harmonisation
    [Show full text]
  • Thirtieth Annual Report 2008
    ANNUAL REPORT 2008 ANNUAL REPORT 2008 Law RefoRm Commission annuaL RepoRt 2008 THE COMMISSION: COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF 20081 the Law Reform Commission consists of a president, one full-time Commissioner and three part-time Commissioners The Hon Mrs Justice Catherine McGuinness President Patricia T Rickard-Clarke BCL, solicitor Full-time Commissioner Professor Finbarr McAuley BCL, LLB, mphil, LLD, Jean monnet professor of Criminal Law, university College Dublin Part-time Commissioner Marian Shanley BCL, solicitor member of the Commission to inquire into Child abuse Part-time Commissioner Donal O’Donnell senior Counsel Part-time Commissioner 1 n ot all staff were employed for the full calendar year 3 Law RefoRm Commission annuaL RepoRt 2008 COMMISSION STAFF IN 2008 Director of Research Raymond Byrne BCL, LLm (nui), Barrister-at-Law project manager for Restatement of statute Law Alma Clissmann Ba (mod), LLB, Dip eur Law (Bruges), solicitor project manager for Legislation Directory Deirdre Ahern LLB, LLm (Cantab), Dip e-Commerce (Law society), solicitor (to april 2008) Heather Mahon LLB (ling. Ger), m. Litt (tCD), Barrister-at-Law Legal Researchers2 John p Byrne BCL, LLm (nui), Barrister-at-Law Chris Campbell B Corp, LLB (nui), Diop sa Gh (nui) Áine Clancy BCL, LLm (nui) frances Colclough BCL, LLm (nui) margaret Devaney LLB (nui), LLm (tCD) Kate Dineen LLB, LLm (Cantab) siobhan Drislane BCL, LLm (nui) Kristian Douglas Ba (Law and History) (oxon), LLm (tCD) elizabeth fitzgerald LLB (tCD), msc (edinburgh), Barrister-at-Law philip flaherty BCL,
    [Show full text]
  • WORLD COMPETITION Law and Economics Review Published By: Kluwer Law International PO Box 316 2400 AH Alphen Aan Den Rijn the Netherlands Website
    WORLD COMPETITION Law and Economics Review Published by: Kluwer Law International PO Box 316 2400 AH Alphen aan den Rijn The Netherlands Website:www.kluwerlaw.com Sold and distributed in North, Central and South America by: Aspen Publishers, Inc. 7201 McKinney Circle Frederick, MD 21704 United States of America Email: [email protected] Sold and distributed in all other countries by: Turpin Distribution Services Ltd. Stratton Business Park Pegasus Drive, Biggleswade Bedfordshire SG18 8TQ United Kingdom Email: [email protected] World Competition is published quarterly (March, June, September, and December). Print subscription prices, including postage (2014):EUR 657/USD 877/GBP 483. Online subscription prices (2014):EUR 608/USD 811/GBP 447 (covers two concurrent users). World Competition is indexed/abstracted in the European Legal Journals Index. Printed on acid-free paper. ISSN 1011-4548 © 2013 Kluwer Law International BV, The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the publisher. Permission to use this content must be obtained from the copyright owner. Please apply to: Permissions Department, Wolters Kluwer Legal, 76 Ninth Avenue, 7th Floor, New York, NY 10011-5201, USA. Email: [email protected] Printed and Bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY. Editor José Rivas Associate Editor Elaine Davis Book Review Editor Valentine Korah Publisher Simon Bellamy US Review Editors Spencer Weber Waller & Maurice E. Stucke Economics Review Editor Doris Hildebrand Advisory Board Robert Anderson, World Trade Organization Sir Christopher Bellamy, President, Appeals Tribunal, United Kingdom Competition Commission Manuel Conthe, Former Chairman of Spain’s Securities Commission Sir David Edward, Professor, University of Edinburgh; former Judge, Court of Justice of the European Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Formal Sitting on 6 October 2003
    Press and Information Division PRESS RELEASE No 85/03 7 October 2003 * * * NEW MEMBERS OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES FORMAL SITTING ON 6 OCTOBER 2003 On 23 July 2003, the Conference of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States adopted a decision appointing Judges and Advocates General of the Court of Justice of the European Communities for the period from 7 October 2003 to 6 October 2009. By that decision, the terms of office of Mr Claus Gulmann, Mrs Fidelma Macken, Mr Allan Rosas, Mr Romain Schintgen and Mr Vassilios Skouris are renewed. The terms of office of Advocates General Francis Jacobs and Dámaso Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer are also renewed. The Representatives of the Governments of the Member States also appointed Mr Koen Lenaerts and Ms Rosario Silva de Lapuerta as Judges of the Court of Justice and Ms Juliane Kokott and Mr Luis Miguel Poiares Pessoa Maduro as Advocates General. At its meeting of 24 September 2003, the Conference of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States appointed Mr Franklin Dehousse as a Judge at the Court of First Instance for the period from 7 October 2003 to 31 August 2004. A formal sitting took place yesterday, Monday 6 October 2003, on the occasion of the end of the term of office and departure of Mr Gil Carlos Rodríguez Iglesias, President of the Court of Justice, of Mr Melchior Wathelet, Judge, and of Advocates General Siegbert Alber and Jean Mischo, and the entry into office of the new Members.
    [Show full text]
  • District Court 12 Court Rules Committees 12
    2199 Cover 14/05/2008 12:43 Page 1 Freedom of Information Guide Freedom Freedom of Information Guide Sections 15 & 16, Freedom of Information Act, 1997 (as amended) Sections 15 & 16, Freedom of Information Act, 1997 of Information Sections 15 & 16, Freedom Produced by the Courts Service, Information Office, Phoenix House, 15 / 24 Phoenix Street North, Smithfield, Dublin 7. April 2008 2199 www.gsdc.net Freedom Of Information Guide Sections 15 & 16 Freedom of Information Act, 1997 (as amended) Courts Service Section 15 & 16 Freedom of Information Guide ii Section 15 & 16 Freedom of Information Guide Index Preamble 1 Freedom of Information 3 The Courts System in Ireland 7 The Supreme Court 8 The Court of Criminal AppeaL 8 The Courts-Martial Appeal Court 9 The High Court 9 The Central Criminal Court 10 The Special Criminal Court 11 The Circuit Court 11 The District Court 12 Court Rules Committees 12 Part I - Section 15 Freedom of Information Act 13 The Courts Service 14 Courts Service Organisational Chart 16 Supreme and High Court Directorate 18 Supreme Court Office, Office of the Court of Criminal Appeal and Courts-Martial Appeal Court 20 Offices of the High Court 23 The Central Office 23 Office of the Official Assignee in Bankruptcy 26 Office of the Taxing Master 31 The Probate Office 34 The Office of the Accountant of the Courts of Justice 38 Office of the Examiner of the High Court 41 General Solicitors for Minors and Wards of Court 45 Office of the Wards of Court 49 Circuit and District Court Directorate 52 Circuit Court Offices 54 District
    [Show full text]
  • Charting the Course of the Garda Force
    LAW SOCIETY GazetteGazette€3.75 December 2008 CHIEFCHIEF INSPECTOR:INSPECTOR: Charting the course of the Garda force INSIDE: MEET THE PRESIDENT • HUMAN RIGHTS CONFERENCE • WRITING A KILLER CV • ELDER ABUSE Specialist legal guidance from the experts BRAND NEW BRAND NEW NEW TITLE Irish Company Employment Law Regulatory Law Secretary’s Handbook General editor: Maeve Regan in Ireland By Jacqueline McGowan-Smyth and Your definitive guide to employment law By Niamh Connery and David Hodnett This practical new book brings together the Eleanor Daly A unique new examination of the knowledge and expertise of Ireland’s leading enforcement and practice of regulatory The very latest company secretarial employment, tax and pension practitioners. law in Ireland procedures and legal guidelines It supplies comprehensive legal information This practical NEW handbook takes you on all aspects of employment and labour law. This new title outlines and examines the through the company secretarial procedures in This includes: regulatory landscape in Ireland including the regulator’s power to prosecute. The use today - the latest Acts and regulations, plus Sources of employment law your practical day to day tasks. Whatever the guidance highlights the powers of authorised The employment relationship situation faced, you’ll find the instructions you officers on a raid or inspection and the rights Pensions and benefits need within the pages of this superb guide. of the persons raided. Employment equality Designed as an everyday manual, Irish You will benefit from easily digestible Termination of employment Company Secretary’s Handbook enables you to: information on the very latest cases and Collective aspects of the employment legislation.
    [Show full text]
  • De Baere - Wouters PAGE: 7 SESS: 5 OUTPUT: Mon Oct 5 11:23:18 2015
    JOBNAME: de Baere - Wouters PAGE: 7 SESS: 5 OUTPUT: Mon Oct 5 11:23:18 2015 Contributors Serge Brammertz is the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribu- nal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). In Belgium, he has served as Deputy to the Prosecutor-General at the Liège Court of Appeal, was in charge of coordinating investigations in the fields of international drug trafficking and trafficking of human beings as a national magistrate, and was later the Belgian federal chief prosecutor. He was Deputy Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, in charge of the Investigations Division of the Office of the Prosecutor when the investigations of crimes committed in Uganda, the DRC and Darfur were initiated. In 2006–07 he headed the investigation by the UN International Independent Investiga- tion Commission into the murder of the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. He holds a law degree from the Université catholique de Louvain, a degree in criminology from the University of Liège and a PhD in international law from the Albert Ludwig University in Freiburg, Germany. He is currently also visiting professor at Strathmore law school, Nairobi, teaching international criminal law Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade has been a Judge at the Inter- national Court of Justice (ICJ) since 2009. He holds an LLM and PhD in International Law from the University of Cambridge. He is a Full Professor of Public International Law at the University of Brasilia and was a lecturer at the Hague Academy of International Law. He received honorary degrees at the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, the Central University of Chile, the Catholic University of Peru, the Ameri- can University of Paraguay and the National University of La Plata.
    [Show full text]
  • Weekly Newsletter Issue 464 Business for Week Beginning 13/11/17
    Weekly Newsletter Issue 464 Business for week beginning 13/11/17 Notice of Appointments Tuesday 7 November 2017 The Government have nominated Tony Murphy as Ireland’s new member of the European Court of Auditors. The appointment will begin in March 2018 and will run for six years. Mr Murphy’s experience spans 30 years, with previous auditing roles in the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General, the European Commission, and the European Court of Auditors. He was chosen during an open competition for the role. The Government must now communicate their nomination to the authorities in Brussels. Upon completion of the European Parliament’s consultation process, and the hearing before the Budgetary Control Committee of the Parliament, the nomination will appear before the European Council for final approval. Mr Murphy will take over the role from Kevin Cardiff, whose position will come to an end in February 2018. * The Government have approved the appointment of Justice Mary Finlay Geoghegan to the Supreme Court; she will fill one of the vacancies left by a number of recent Supreme Court retirements. Ms Finlay Geoghegan was appointed to the High Court in 2002. She was later promoted to the Court of Appeal in 2014. * The Cabinet has also nominated senior counsel David Barniville, a former Chairman of the Bar Council, to the High Court. This follows the retirement of Justice Margaret Heneghan last month. Mr Barniville came a qualified barrister in 1990, and progressed to the level of senior counsel in 2006. Amendment for Health and Social Care Professions to be discussed This week in the Dáil, they will discuss the Health and Social Care Professional (Amendment) Bill 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • The Middle Templar
    The Middle Templar The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple Issue 53 Michaelmas 2013 Middle Temple Officers 2013 Treasurer Christopher Symons QC Deputy Treasurer The Rt Hon the Lord Judge Deputy Treasurer Elect Stephen Hockman QC Lent Reader Professor Graham Zellick CBE QC Autumn Reader The Hon Mrs Justice Parker Director of Middle Temple Advocacy Derek Wood CBE QC Master of the Archive Michael Ashe QC Master of Debating David Reade QC Masters of the Garden Stephen Lloyd Esq The Hon Mrs Justice Parker Master of the House Ian Mayes QC Master of Moots Richard Wilmot-Smith QC Master of Music The Rt Hon Sir Stanley Burnton Master of Revels His Honour Peter Cowell Master of the Silver The Hon Mr Justice Ian Burnett The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple Ashley Building, Middle Temple Lane Temple, London EC4Y 9BT Treasury Office 020 7427 4800 [email protected] ©2013 The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple. All rights reserved. The Middle Temple asserts its moral rights in the contents of this magazine. www.middletemple.org.uk Designed by Mike Pearmaine Farewell to Catherine Quinn In November 2010 Catherine Quinn applied to join us as our Under Treasurer. In her letter of application she told us that in her previous roles she had brought about ‘dramatic service improvements’. She described her style to our head-hunters as ‘strategic, with a clear intent and transformational rather than dictatorial’. When we interviewed Catherine, all involved agreed that she was the right person for the job. We were right! She joined us in May 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Scholarship and External Critique in EU Law Daniela Caruso Boston Univeristy School of Law
    Boston University School of Law Scholarly Commons at Boston University School of Law Faculty Scholarship 2018 Legal Scholarship and External Critique in EU Law Daniela Caruso Boston Univeristy School of Law Fernanda Nicola American University - Washington College of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the European Law Commons Recommended Citation Daniela Caruso & Fernanda Nicola, Legal Scholarship and External Critique in EU Law, Transformation of Reconstitution of Europe: The rC itical Legal Studies Perspective on the Role of Courts in the European Union 221 (2018). Available at: https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/367 This Book Chapter is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons at Boston University School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons at Boston University School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. American University Washington College of Law Washington College of Law Research Paper No. 2016-30 LEGAL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXTERNAL CRITIQUE IN EU LAW Daniela Caruso Fernanda Nicola This paper can be downloaded without charge from The Social Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection 10 Legal Scholarship and External Critique in EU Law DANIELA CARUSO * AND FERNANDA NICOLA * * I. Introduction: Nostalgia and Engagement Why, readers might wonder, would a group of Croatian legal scholars spearhead this volume ? Why would they care, at this specifi c juncture in the history of EU law, to refl ect on a movement — Critical Legal Studies (CLS) — born in the peculiar and utterly American socio-legal context of the 1970s ? Two explanations come to mind.
    [Show full text]