Download Free The Future Of The European Judicial System In A Comparative Perspective Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online The Future Of The European Judicial System In A Comparative Perspective and write the review.

The future of the European judicial system and the constitutional role of the European courts were the topics of the 6th Colloquium of the European Constitutional Law Network (ECLN), which took place in Berlin in November 2005. It was jointly organized by the ECLN and the International Association of Constitutional Law (IACL). This book reflects the topics of the colloquium where judges from the European Courts and the highest national courts, and experts on European and Constitutional Law from all over the world exchanged experiences and developed concepts for future EU judicial architecture. Subjects like the composition of the courts, election procedures for the judges, and their relationship to the ordinary judiciary are compared, and the role of the ECJ in the European Judicial System is discussed.
This volume outlines the major features of the controversies leading up to the Intergovernmental Conference, especially those related to the Court's Paper and the Working Party Report. The outcomes of these debates, as represented by the Nice agreements, are also considered. Major documents and the proceedings of a July 2000 conference at Churchill College are included. Distributed by ISBS. No index. c. Book News Inc.
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has started to implement what is arguably the most signi cant set of reforms since the Nice Treaty, with notably the doubling of the number of judges at the General Court and the disappearance of the Civil Service Tribunal. Controversies surrounding the process and outcomes of the reforms called for a broader re ection on the European Courts and the way they cope with old and new challenges. To this end, this volume brings together junior and seasoned academics and practitioners to take stock of the various aspects of these reforms and the overall functioning of the EU Judiciary, from comparative, ‘insider’, and ‘outsider’ perspectives. Broadening and deepening our understanding of the reorganisation of the EU Judiciary, the contributors offer incisive analyses of reforms and evolutions, including: – a critical appraisal of the reform process and the role and powers of the CJEU; – implications of the reforms for the Court of Justice and the General Court; – lessons from the practice of the now dismantled Civil Service Tribunal; – a re ection on the future Uni ed Patent Court; – an evaluation of the role of the CJEU’s members and staffs and their selection; – an insider’s perspective into the workings of the repeat players (Legal Services of the European Commission and of the European Parliament) and the parties’ lawyers; – an assessment of the procedural reforms before the Court of Justice and the General Court with a speci c focus on the PPU; – the unfolding and impact of the digital revolution (e-Curia) on the CJEU; – the challenges of the languages regime and legal reasoning before the CJEU. Comparative perspectives elucidate speci c judiciary reforms across Europe, including detailed analyses of developments at the European Court of Human Rights, the French Conseil Constitutionnel, and the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. As a timely assessment of the effects of recent reforms on the EU Courts’ decision-making practices, roles, and identities, and more broadly on the legitimacy of the EU and its institutions as a whole, this book is unparalleled. It will be of great value to practitioners engaged in EU litigation, scholars of European law and policymakers at EU institutions, and all those interested in judicial process and reform.
Covers subjects such as: the composition of courts, election procedures for the judges, the judges relationship to the ordinary judiciary, the role of the ECJ in the European judicial system.
Karen Alter's work on the European Court of Justice heralded a new level of sophistication in the political analysis of the controversial institution, through its combination of legal understanding and active engagement with theoretical questions. The European Court's Political Power assembles the most important of Alter's articles written over a fourteen year span, adding an original new introduction and a conclusion that takes an overview of the Court's development andcurrent concerns.Together the articles provide insight into the historical and political contours of the ECJ's influence on European politics, explaining how and why the impact of an institution can vary so greatly over time and access different issues. The book starts with the European Coal and Steel Community, where the ECJ was largely unable to facilitate greater member state respect for ECSC rules. Alter then shows how legal actors orchestrated an activist transformation of the European legal system, withthe critical aid of jurist advocacy movements, and via the co-optation of national courts. The transformation of the European legal system wrested control from member states over the meaning of European law, but the ECJ continues to have varying influence across different issues. Alter explains thatthe differing influence of the ECJ comes from the varied extent to which sub- and supra-national actors turn to it to achieve political objectives.Looking beyond the European experience, the book includes four chapters that put the ECJ into a comparative perspective, examining the extent to which the ECJ experience is a unique harbinger of the future role international courts may play in international and comparative politics.
This book provides precious insight into the dynamics of this new approach to consolidating European Civil Justice, clearly outlining the motivations of the various national and institutional players involved and examining potential obstacles likely to be encountered along the way. The book represents a work of reference for anyone involved in academia, practice or law reform in this subject area.
This book provides insight into modern collective judicial decision-making. Courts all over the world sit in panels of several judges, yet the processes by which these judges produce the courts' decisions differ markedly. Judges from some of the world's most notable judicial bodies, in both the civilian and the common law tradition and from supra-/international courts, share their experiences and reflect on the challenges to which their collective endeavour gives rise. They address matters such as the question of panel constitution, the operation of rapporteur systems, pre- and post-hearing conferences, the hearing procedure itself, the nature of the interaction between the judicial panel and parties' advocates, the extent to which a unitary judgment of the court or at least a single majority judgment is required or deemed desirable, and how it is ultimately arrived at through different voting mechanisms. The judicial views are supplemented by a number of academic commentaries. Collective Judging in Comparative Perspective serves as an inspiration for future court design. Sir Jack Beatson (formerly Court of Appeal of England and Wales) Thomas von Danwitz (Court of Justice of the European Union) Matthew Dyson (University of Oxford) Harry T Edwards (United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit) Wolfgang Ernst (University of Oxford) Kevin Garnett QC (formerly Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office) Msgr Markus Graulich (Pontifical Council for Legislative Text) Beate Gsell (Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Munich) Birke Häcker (University of Oxford) Dominique Hascher (Cour de cassation) Sir Launcelot Henderson (Court of Appeal of England and Wales) Rchard Hyland (Rutgers Law School) Susan Kiefel AC (High Court of Australia) Georg Kodek (Austrian Supreme Court) James Lee (King's College London) Sir Keith Lindblom (Court of Appeal of England and Wales) Gertrude Lübbe-Wolff (formerly German Federal Constitutional Court) Theodor Meron (International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals) Angelika Nussberger (formerly European Court of Human Rights) Akira Ojima (Chief Judicial Research Official, Supreme Court of Japan) Naoki Onishi (Otsu District Court, Japan) Christos Ravanides (Office of Legal Affairs, United Nations) Lord Reed of Allermuir (Supreme Court of the United Kingdom) Thomas Rüfner (University of Trier) Johanna Schmidt-Räntsch (German Federal Court of Justice) Thomas Stadelmann (Swiss Supreme Court) Wolfgang Ernst is Regius Professor of Civil Law, University of Oxford, and Fellow of All Souls College.Birke Häcker is the Professor of Comparative Law, University of Oxford, and Fellow of Brasenose College.
This book focuses on the decision-making processes in modern collegiate courts. Judges from some of the world s highest and most significant judicial bodies, both national and supranational, share their experiences and reflect on the challenges to which their joint judicial endeavour gives rise.
The Euro-crisis and the legal responses to it have profoundly changed the constitutional architecture of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) leading to the introduction of tighter budgetary rules, new mechanisms of financial stabilization and a comprehensive framework of economic adjustment for states in fiscal troubles. Yet, during the last years, the legal measures enacted by the European Union (EU) and the member states to respond to the crisis have increasingly fell prey to the scrutiny of courts, both at the national and supranational level. This paper provides a first comprehensive analysis of decisions by high courts in Estonia, France, Germany, Ireland, Portugal and the EU with the aim to discuss the role of the judiciary in fiscal affairs. The paper identifies a trend of increasing judicial involvement in EMU and explains it in light of the intergovernmental approach followed to respond to the Euro-crisis. As the paper argues, the choice of an intergovernmental management of the crisis, with frequent resort to international agreements outside the framework of EU law, has paradoxically produced greater judicialization than what would have occurred had the member states acted within the EU legal order. As the paper suggests, though, constitutional arguments related to expertise, voice and rights still plead in favor of letting the political branches take the lead in fiscal affairs. Hence, the paper concludes by indicating that future reforms of the EMU should be carried out through EU legislation - which is more legitimate in democratic terms (because of the political guarantees that surround law-making in the EU) and more secure in judicial terms (because of the more limited space for judicial overreach). Yet, the paper also underlines how the EU political process needs urgently to be reformed in order to improve its legitimacy and democracy.