欧盟最高法院判例法和实践中的比较法路线图

IF 0.6 Q2 Social Sciences Utrecht Law Review Pub Date : 2021-05-26 DOI:10.36633/ULR.692
Maarten Feteris
{"title":"欧盟最高法院判例法和实践中的比较法路线图","authors":"Maarten Feteris","doi":"10.36633/ULR.692","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This document was developed following research and debates of the Network of Presidents of the Supreme Judicial Courts of the European Union. The document is intended to support the courts in this network in a practical way when considering and implementing the use of comparative law in the decision of a case pending before their court. Without pretention of completeness or scientific reliability, it summarizes the decisions to be made and the dilemmas to be solved by the Supreme Courts in this process. It mentions viewpoints which may be relevant when making choices at crossroads in the decision-making process. In addition, it gives practical information for this process, inspired by useful practices amongst the member courts of the network.","PeriodicalId":44535,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Roadmap on Comparative Law in the Case-Law and Practice of the Supreme Courts of the EU\",\"authors\":\"Maarten Feteris\",\"doi\":\"10.36633/ULR.692\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This document was developed following research and debates of the Network of Presidents of the Supreme Judicial Courts of the European Union. The document is intended to support the courts in this network in a practical way when considering and implementing the use of comparative law in the decision of a case pending before their court. Without pretention of completeness or scientific reliability, it summarizes the decisions to be made and the dilemmas to be solved by the Supreme Courts in this process. It mentions viewpoints which may be relevant when making choices at crossroads in the decision-making process. In addition, it gives practical information for this process, inspired by useful practices amongst the member courts of the network.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44535,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Utrecht Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Utrecht Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36633/ULR.692\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utrecht Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36633/ULR.692","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文件是在欧洲联盟最高司法法院院长网络的研究和辩论之后编写的。该文件旨在以实际的方式支持该网络中的法院在考虑和实施在法院未决案件的裁决中使用比较法。它不以完整性或科学可靠性为借口,总结了最高法院在这一过程中要做出的决定和要解决的困境。它提到了在决策过程的十字路口做出选择时可能相关的观点。此外,受网络成员法院的有益做法启发,它为这一过程提供了实用信息。
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
Roadmap on Comparative Law in the Case-Law and Practice of the Supreme Courts of the EU
This document was developed following research and debates of the Network of Presidents of the Supreme Judicial Courts of the European Union. The document is intended to support the courts in this network in a practical way when considering and implementing the use of comparative law in the decision of a case pending before their court. Without pretention of completeness or scientific reliability, it summarizes the decisions to be made and the dilemmas to be solved by the Supreme Courts in this process. It mentions viewpoints which may be relevant when making choices at crossroads in the decision-making process. In addition, it gives practical information for this process, inspired by useful practices amongst the member courts of the network.
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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊最新文献
Field Experiments Examining Trust in Law: Interviewer Effects on Participants with Lower Educational Backgrounds Legitimacy as Expressed versus Legitimacy as Experienced: Methodologies to Assess an Elusive Concept Towards Evidence-Based Legitimacy Interventions in EU Law: Challenges and Directions for Empirical Research Digitalisation of Enforcement Proceedings (Re)defining Conflicts: Democratic Legitimacy in Socially Sensitive Court Cases
×
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