欧盟委员会的解释性指导和国家法院

Kathryn Wright
{"title":"欧盟委员会的解释性指导和国家法院","authors":"Kathryn Wright","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2895043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Given the extent of soft law and interpretative guidance by bodies which are not courts, there is a need for further insight into interinstitutional communication between the EU and national levels. This contribution focuses upon the ‘diagonal’ relationship between the European Commission and national courts. It explores the impact of the Commission’s ostensibly non-binding interpretative guidance on national judicial decision-making. Applying the concepts of active and passive interpretation of EU law by the Commission to cases in national courts, it examines the relative interpretative roles of the Commission and the Court of Justice, and finds examples of both being employed. Through active interpretation it can be argued that the Commission oversteps its competence. However, the Commission also uses its role to ‘bootstrap’ the Court of Justice’s case law and further encourage compliance. The significance of soft law is viewed both from the ‘supply side’ of the European Commission, revealing its representation of the EU interest in context, and the ‘demand side’ of national courts as recipients.","PeriodicalId":401648,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law: EU eJournal","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The European Commission's Interpretative Guidance and National Courts\",\"authors\":\"Kathryn Wright\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2895043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Given the extent of soft law and interpretative guidance by bodies which are not courts, there is a need for further insight into interinstitutional communication between the EU and national levels. This contribution focuses upon the ‘diagonal’ relationship between the European Commission and national courts. It explores the impact of the Commission’s ostensibly non-binding interpretative guidance on national judicial decision-making. Applying the concepts of active and passive interpretation of EU law by the Commission to cases in national courts, it examines the relative interpretative roles of the Commission and the Court of Justice, and finds examples of both being employed. Through active interpretation it can be argued that the Commission oversteps its competence. However, the Commission also uses its role to ‘bootstrap’ the Court of Justice’s case law and further encourage compliance. The significance of soft law is viewed both from the ‘supply side’ of the European Commission, revealing its representation of the EU interest in context, and the ‘demand side’ of national courts as recipients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":401648,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Public Law: EU eJournal\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Public Law: EU eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2895043\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Public Law: EU eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2895043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

鉴于软法律和非法院机构的解释性指导的程度,有必要进一步深入了解欧盟和国家一级之间的机构间沟通。这一贡献着重于欧洲委员会和国家法院之间的“对角线”关系。它探讨了委员会表面上不具约束力的解释性指导对国家司法决策的影响。将欧盟委员会对欧盟法律的主动和被动解释的概念应用到国家法院的案件中,它研究了欧盟委员会和法院的相对解释角色,并找到了两者都被采用的例子。通过积极的解释,可以认为委员会越权了。然而,委员会也利用其角色“引导”法院的判例法,并进一步鼓励遵守。软法的重要性可以从欧盟委员会的“供应方”和作为接受者的国家法院的“需求方”两方面来看待,前者揭示了欧盟在背景下的利益代表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The European Commission's Interpretative Guidance and National Courts
Given the extent of soft law and interpretative guidance by bodies which are not courts, there is a need for further insight into interinstitutional communication between the EU and national levels. This contribution focuses upon the ‘diagonal’ relationship between the European Commission and national courts. It explores the impact of the Commission’s ostensibly non-binding interpretative guidance on national judicial decision-making. Applying the concepts of active and passive interpretation of EU law by the Commission to cases in national courts, it examines the relative interpretative roles of the Commission and the Court of Justice, and finds examples of both being employed. Through active interpretation it can be argued that the Commission oversteps its competence. However, the Commission also uses its role to ‘bootstrap’ the Court of Justice’s case law and further encourage compliance. The significance of soft law is viewed both from the ‘supply side’ of the European Commission, revealing its representation of the EU interest in context, and the ‘demand side’ of national courts as recipients.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The European Parliament and Brexit Commission v Poland C-562/19 P: Turnover Taxation and State Aid Law Brexit and the Implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement The EU Protection of Tax Data Transferred to Third Countries 'Re-Constituting' the Internal Market: Towards a Common Law of International Trade?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1