高等法院的任命与失约:第二部分-夏普斯顿诉讼

K. Bradley
{"title":"高等法院的任命与失约:第二部分-夏普斯顿诉讼","authors":"K. Bradley","doi":"10.1163/15718034-12341469","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis second and concluding part of a two-part article considers the annulment actions by Advocate General Sharpston of the CJEU seeking to challenge the premature termination of her term of office as a result of a decision of the Member State governments, following withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. While in its case law the Court of Justice has been in the vanguard in ensuring the protection of judicial independence in the courts of the Member States and the right of judges to a review of decisions entailing their dismissal, Ms. Sharpston’s proceedings were rejected by both the General Court and on appeal the Court of Justice essentially on grounds of lack of jurisdiction. The Courts’ reasoning is incomplete and unconvincing, and doubts remain as to whether the former Advocate General has been afforded effective judicial protection of her claimed right to finish out her term of office.","PeriodicalId":42613,"journal":{"name":"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Appointment and Dis-Appointment at the CJEU: Part II – The Sharpston Litigation\",\"authors\":\"K. Bradley\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718034-12341469\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThis second and concluding part of a two-part article considers the annulment actions by Advocate General Sharpston of the CJEU seeking to challenge the premature termination of her term of office as a result of a decision of the Member State governments, following withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. While in its case law the Court of Justice has been in the vanguard in ensuring the protection of judicial independence in the courts of the Member States and the right of judges to a review of decisions entailing their dismissal, Ms. Sharpston’s proceedings were rejected by both the General Court and on appeal the Court of Justice essentially on grounds of lack of jurisdiction. The Courts’ reasoning is incomplete and unconvincing, and doubts remain as to whether the former Advocate General has been afforded effective judicial protection of her claimed right to finish out her term of office.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341469\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341469","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这是由两部分组成的文章的第二部分,也是最后一部分,考虑了欧洲法院夏普斯顿总检察长的撤销行动,她试图挑战在联合王国退出欧盟后,由于成员国政府的决定而过早终止她的任期。虽然法院在其判例法中一直在确保保护会员国法院的司法独立和法官对导致其被解雇的决定进行复审的权利方面处于领先地位,但Sharpston女士的诉讼被普通法院和法院在上诉时主要以缺乏管辖权为理由予以驳回。法院的推理是不完整和不令人信服的,对于前总检察长是否得到了有效的司法保护,以保护她所声称的完成其任期的权利,仍然存在疑问。
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
Appointment and Dis-Appointment at the CJEU: Part II – The Sharpston Litigation
This second and concluding part of a two-part article considers the annulment actions by Advocate General Sharpston of the CJEU seeking to challenge the premature termination of her term of office as a result of a decision of the Member State governments, following withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. While in its case law the Court of Justice has been in the vanguard in ensuring the protection of judicial independence in the courts of the Member States and the right of judges to a review of decisions entailing their dismissal, Ms. Sharpston’s proceedings were rejected by both the General Court and on appeal the Court of Justice essentially on grounds of lack of jurisdiction. The Courts’ reasoning is incomplete and unconvincing, and doubts remain as to whether the former Advocate General has been afforded effective judicial protection of her claimed right to finish out her term of office.
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
1.30
自引率
40.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals is firmly established as the leading journal in its field. Each issue will give you the latest developments with respect to the preparation, adoption, suspension, amendment and revision of Rules of Procedure as well as statutory and internal rules and other related matters. The Journal will also provide you with the latest practice with respect to the interpretation and application of rules of procedure and constitutional documents, which can be found in judgments, advisory opinions, written and oral pleadings as well as legal literature.
期刊最新文献
Situating “Deformalization” within the International Court of Justice: Understanding Institutionalised Informality The World Is Burning, Urgently and Irreparably – a Plea for Interim Protection against Climatic Change at the ICJ “Cross Treaty Interpretation” en bloc or How CAFTA-DR Tribunals Are Systematically Interpreting the FET Standard Based on NAFTA Case Law The Asian Turn in Foreign Investment, edited by Mahdev Mohan and Chester Brown Not Just a Participation Trophy? Advancing Public Interests through Advisory Opinions at the International Court of Justice
×
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