Abstract
Legal scholars have regularly focused on the conflict episodes between the Court of Justice and national constitutional courts. We try instead to investigate the techniques that both the Court of Justice and its national counterparts use to develop a hidden judicial dialogue, through which a non-legally bound harmonization is pursued, and mostly achieved. Moreover, we understand these strategies in the light of the notion of comity, and we compare the opposite attitudes kept by the Court of Justice towards national courts and international tribunals to describe its shifting attitude, which is due to its interest in preserving a pre-eminent position in the interpretive competition over EC law.
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.
