Multijuralism and Interpretative Comparison by Judge of International Organizations: European Union Case

Abstract

The article examines the national solutions (comparison) used by European Union judge in interpretation. The analysis focuses in the beginning some important, yet ancient cases, relating to European Community of Steel and Carbon (ECSC) Treaty. In the 50s and 60s there was an unseen dialogue between the doctrine, the Advocates General and the European judge about the way of interpreting undetermined concepts of ECSC Treaty. The result of this dialogue was the emergence of a ‘standard’ comparison: the ‘multicomparison’. This interpretative comparison was strongly linked to multijuralism (existence of many independent and equal legal systems of the Member States) and loosely linked to multilingualism (the official legal use of multiple languages within EU), both important characteristics of European legal system.In the second moment the analysis examines this ‘standard’ comparison from a methodological perspective. This perspective requires the outlining of interpretative methodologies developed both in national and in international law. This overview offers the ground for ‘translating’ the ‘standard’ comparison as being a subset of literal or grammatical interpretation belonging to an objective system of interpretation.This powerful and mostly misunderstood instrument of judge played a major and hidden role in the evolution of European law. It may provide also hints and solutions for national or international situations where pluralism either at linguistic level (multilinguism) or at legal level (multijuralism) is at stake.