Systematic criteria can be considered as the most important inter- pretative tools in the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). According to Miguel Maduro the very idea of constitutional pluralism implies the possibility of conflicts between different con- stitutional poles. Often these antinomies have been solved by relying on systematic criteria in the case law of the CJEU. In order to show the importance of these criteria I shall present the example of proportionality, described as a systematic, flexible, and residual technique for the solution of interpretative conflicts. In a second moment, relying on Tridimas, I shall also show how proportionality, being a flexible systematic criterion, is also useful to tame the conflicts between the CJEU and national judges. In order to do that six cases will be analysed.
I criteri sistematici come strumento di governo del pluralismo costituzionale UE
orlando scarcello
2014-01-01
Abstract
Systematic criteria can be considered as the most important inter- pretative tools in the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). According to Miguel Maduro the very idea of constitutional pluralism implies the possibility of conflicts between different con- stitutional poles. Often these antinomies have been solved by relying on systematic criteria in the case law of the CJEU. In order to show the importance of these criteria I shall present the example of proportionality, described as a systematic, flexible, and residual technique for the solution of interpretative conflicts. In a second moment, relying on Tridimas, I shall also show how proportionality, being a flexible systematic criterion, is also useful to tame the conflicts between the CJEU and national judges. In order to do that six cases will be analysed.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
