《国际海洋法公约》第267条“法院或法庭”自治概念的新推定

IF 1.6 2区社会学 Q1 LAW European Constitutional Law Review Pub Date : 2023-05-03 DOI:10.1017/S157401962300007X

Alejandro Sánchez Frías

{"title":"《国际海洋法公约》第267条“法院或法庭”自治概念的新推定","authors":"Alejandro Sánchez Frías","doi":"10.1017/S157401962300007X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the main objectives of the dialogue between the European Court of Justice and national courts and tribunals is, therefore, to ensure the uniform interpretation of EU law among member states. But are there also any uniform criteria regarding what a ‘court or tribunal’ is for the purpose of engaging in a dialogue with the European Court of Justice? Or is the application of Article 267 TFEU left completely to what individual member states label in their national orders as a ‘court or tribunal’? As we shall see in the first part of this study, this problem is not new, but it is clear from the case law of the past six decades that the European Court of Justice","PeriodicalId":45815,"journal":{"name":"European Constitutional Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A New Presumption for the Autonomous Concept of ‘Court or Tribunal’ in Article 267 TFEU\",\"authors\":\"Alejandro Sánchez Frías\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S157401962300007X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"One of the main objectives of the dialogue between the European Court of Justice and national courts and tribunals is, therefore, to ensure the uniform interpretation of EU law among member states. But are there also any uniform criteria regarding what a ‘court or tribunal’ is for the purpose of engaging in a dialogue with the European Court of Justice? Or is the application of Article 267 TFEU left completely to what individual member states label in their national orders as a ‘court or tribunal’? As we shall see in the first part of this study, this problem is not new, but it is clear from the case law of the past six decades that the European Court of Justice\",\"PeriodicalId\":45815,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Constitutional Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Constitutional Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S157401962300007X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Constitutional Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S157401962300007X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

因此，欧洲法院与国家法院和法庭之间对话的主要目标之一是确保成员国之间对欧盟法律的统一解释。但是，对于与欧洲法院进行对话的“法院或法庭”是什么，是否也有统一的标准?或者，是否将第267条的适用完全留给各成员国在其国家命令中标记为“法院或法庭”的机构?正如我们将在本研究的第一部分中看到的那样，这个问题并不新鲜，但从过去六十年的判例法中可以清楚地看出，欧洲法院

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

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

A New Presumption for the Autonomous Concept of ‘Court or Tribunal’ in Article 267 TFEU

One of the main objectives of the dialogue between the European Court of Justice and national courts and tribunals is, therefore, to ensure the uniform interpretation of EU law among member states. But are there also any uniform criteria regarding what a ‘court or tribunal’ is for the purpose of engaging in a dialogue with the European Court of Justice? Or is the application of Article 267 TFEU left completely to what individual member states label in their national orders as a ‘court or tribunal’? As we shall see in the first part of this study, this problem is not new, but it is clear from the case law of the past six decades that the European Court of Justice

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

European Constitutional Law Review LAW-

CiteScore

2.80

自引率

14.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： The European Constitutional Law Review (EuConst), a peer reviewed English language journal, is a platform for advancing the study of European constitutional law, its history and evolution. Its scope is European law and constitutional law, history and theory, comparative law and jurisprudence. Published triannually, it contains articles on doctrine, scholarship and history, plus jurisprudence and book reviews. However, the premier issue includes more than twenty short articles by leading experts, each addressing a single topic in the Draft Constitutional Treaty for Europe. EuConst is addressed at academics, professionals, politicians and others involved or interested in the European constitutional process.