克罗地亚法院为解释性义务做好准备了吗?

IF 0.5 4区 社会学 Q3 LAW Review of Central and East European Law Pub Date : 2019-12-04 DOI:10.1163/15730352-04404003
Antonija Ivančan, Davor Petrić
{"title":"克罗地亚法院为解释性义务做好准备了吗?","authors":"Antonija Ivančan, Davor Petrić","doi":"10.1163/15730352-04404003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses compliance with the interpretive obligation by Croatian courts five years into Croatia’s membership in the EU. Our aim is to analyze whether Croatian courts have (and, if so, to what extent) accepted this obligation. We will first review the Croatian courts’ record of compliance with the interpretive obligation during the pre-accession period, and revisit some of the existing findings. In the second part, we turn to analysis of the Croatian courts’ record of compliance with the interpretive obligation following accession. Some of the key findings are: higher national courts have accepted that the EU interpretive obligation binds all national courts; lower national courts have fully embraced this obligation; the Constitutional Court struggles with adopting a clear position on the interpretive obligation. We conclude by observing whether EU membership has contributed to the transformation of legal culture and the relationship between different judicial instances in Croatia.","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"493-526"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are Croatian Courts Prepared for the Interpretive Obligation?\",\"authors\":\"Antonija Ivančan, Davor Petrić\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15730352-04404003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article discusses compliance with the interpretive obligation by Croatian courts five years into Croatia’s membership in the EU. Our aim is to analyze whether Croatian courts have (and, if so, to what extent) accepted this obligation. We will first review the Croatian courts’ record of compliance with the interpretive obligation during the pre-accession period, and revisit some of the existing findings. In the second part, we turn to analysis of the Croatian courts’ record of compliance with the interpretive obligation following accession. Some of the key findings are: higher national courts have accepted that the EU interpretive obligation binds all national courts; lower national courts have fully embraced this obligation; the Constitutional Court struggles with adopting a clear position on the interpretive obligation. We conclude by observing whether EU membership has contributed to the transformation of legal culture and the relationship between different judicial instances in Croatia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42845,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Central and East European Law\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"493-526\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Central and East European Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-04404003\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Central and East European Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-04404003","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文讨论克罗地亚法院在克罗地亚加入欧盟五年后对解释性义务的遵守情况。我们的目的是分析克罗地亚法院是否(如果有的话,在何种程度上)接受了这项义务。我们将首先审查克罗地亚法院在加入前期间遵守解释性义务的记录,并重新审议一些现有的调查结果。在第二部分,我们转而分析克罗地亚法院在加入后履行解释性义务的记录。一些关键的发现是:高等国家法院已经接受欧盟的解释性义务对所有国家法院具有约束力;下级国家法院已经完全接受了这一义务;宪法法院很难就解释义务采取明确的立场。我们通过观察欧盟成员资格是否有助于克罗地亚法律文化的转变和不同司法实例之间的关系来得出结论。
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
Are Croatian Courts Prepared for the Interpretive Obligation?
This article discusses compliance with the interpretive obligation by Croatian courts five years into Croatia’s membership in the EU. Our aim is to analyze whether Croatian courts have (and, if so, to what extent) accepted this obligation. We will first review the Croatian courts’ record of compliance with the interpretive obligation during the pre-accession period, and revisit some of the existing findings. In the second part, we turn to analysis of the Croatian courts’ record of compliance with the interpretive obligation following accession. Some of the key findings are: higher national courts have accepted that the EU interpretive obligation binds all national courts; lower national courts have fully embraced this obligation; the Constitutional Court struggles with adopting a clear position on the interpretive obligation. We conclude by observing whether EU membership has contributed to the transformation of legal culture and the relationship between different judicial instances in Croatia.
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
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Review of Central and East European Law critically examines issues of legal doctrine and practice in the CIS and CEE regions. An important aspect of this is, for example, the harmonization of legal principles and rules; another facet is the legal impact of the intertwining of domestic economies, on the one hand, with regional economies and the processes of international trade and investment on the other. The Review offers a forum for discussion of topical questions of public and private law. The Review encourages comparative research; it is hoped that, in this way, additional insights in legal developments can be communicated to those interested in questions, not only of law, but also of politics, economics, and of society of the CIS and CEE countries.
期刊最新文献
Is Transparency Enough? Informal Governance Networks and the Selection Process of a Georgian Judge to the European Court of Human Rights Validity of Jurisdiction Clauses in Standard Terms and Conditions of International Commercial Contracts under Turkish Law Multiplication of Extraordinary Appeal Measures in Polish Criminal Proceedings: A Guarantee of Justice or Erosion of the Principle of Legal Certainty? Balancing Initial Copyright Ownership in Czech and Slovak Private International Law Accented Universality: Exploring Accountability as a Non-Translatable Concept in Central Asia
×
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