Ultra Vires Review and the Demise of Constitutional Pluralism: the Czecho-Slovak Pension Saga, and the Dangers of State Courts' Defiance of EU Law

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11220%2F16%3A10327521" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11220/16:10327521 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

—

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Ultra Vires Review and the Demise of Constitutional Pluralism: the Czecho-Slovak Pension Saga, and the Dangers of State Courts' Defiance of EU Law

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

The Czech Constitutional Court decision in the Czecho-Slovak pension saga, declaring a judgment of the Court of Justice ultra vires, represents one important step in the debate on the sustainability of the so-called constitutional pluralism in the relation of EU law and domestic legal systems. Although the Czech decision could be ridiculed as simple-minded and failing to leave any lasting footprint in the wider EU legal debate, the author of this article argues otherwise. Facing the specifics of the case, on the one hand, the author argues that the notion of constitutional pluralism remains largely an academic construct, which could be the subject of interesting scholarly debates, while for practitioners, on the other hand, it is flawed and has the potential to lead to dangerous outcomes for people in real life cases.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Ultra Vires Review and the Demise of Constitutional Pluralism: the Czecho-Slovak Pension Saga, and the Dangers of State Courts' Defiance of EU Law

Popis výsledku anglicky

The Czech Constitutional Court decision in the Czecho-Slovak pension saga, declaring a judgment of the Court of Justice ultra vires, represents one important step in the debate on the sustainability of the so-called constitutional pluralism in the relation of EU law and domestic legal systems. Although the Czech decision could be ridiculed as simple-minded and failing to leave any lasting footprint in the wider EU legal debate, the author of this article argues otherwise. Facing the specifics of the case, on the one hand, the author argues that the notion of constitutional pluralism remains largely an academic construct, which could be the subject of interesting scholarly debates, while for practitioners, on the other hand, it is flawed and has the potential to lead to dangerous outcomes for people in real life cases.

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

AG - Právní vědy

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2016

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Maastricht Journal of European &amp; Comparative Law

ISSN

1023-263X

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

23

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

NL - Nizozemsko

Počet stran výsledku

10

Strana od-do

185-194

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—