Abstract
AbstractOver the years, judgments by the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) have been—sometimes heavily—criticized. While the recent reforms to the EU’s judicial system have addressed the high caseload of the General Court of the European Union (“GC”), the perceived lack of quality of the ECJ’s judgments in preliminary rulings procedures remains an issue. This Article will outline in what way these judgments are criticized and try to examine the root causes of the criticism. It goes on to argue that subject matter specialization is an adequate answer to this criticism and examines how subject matter specialization can be introduced into the European Union (“EU”) judicial system.
Highlights
Over the years, judgments by the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) have been—sometimes heavily— criticized
It goes on to argue that subject matter specialization is an adequate answer to this criticism and examines how subject matter specialization can be introduced into the European Union (“EU”) judicial system
We deal with some criticisms of ECJ judgments in the preliminary rulings procedure and examine their root causes
Summary
The validity of the so-called “theory of third-party effect of fundamental rights” depends on this reasoning); Case C-426/11, supra note 10 (the ECJ refers neither to the contractual freedom of employees nor explains the prevailing of the acquirer’s rights); cf EUR. Sometimes the ECJ does not address the questions put to it they touch central issues.[21] When it departs from the wording of a provision, the ECJ’s reasoning is often quite brief This makes it difficult to understand the consequences of the decision. There have been calls for better awareness of the national legal orders.[23] A certain superficiality is on display, for example, where a judgment does not precisely set forth the legal foundation In one such case, Alemo-Herron, the ECJ did not clearly distinguish between rights under employment contracts versus under collective bargaining agreements. When the ECJ, in making its determination, directs its attention only to the Member State where the referral originated, overly inclusive statements have the potential to endanger well-balanced systems of law, and to shift existing balances to the prejudice of one interest or another.[25]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
