Abstract
Building on some of the analyses presented in the previous chapters, this contribution introduce the topic of impact evaluation of CJEU judgments across Member States. The definition of impact of the Court of Justice's judgments on national legal systems is a very complex subject. Identifying the impact and determining its intensity should be an important goal of the EU Commission and the Member States. Currently neither an ex ante impact evaluation nor an ex post impact evaluation of CJEU judgment is carried. The introduction of both would certainly contribute to decisions that predict to a reasonable extent the effects and the differences across Member States. The quality of CJEU jurisprudence would be enhanced by having a selective impact evaluation ex ante and an analysis of the ex post impact of the judgment in different MSs. Much more modestly I would like to suggest that judicial cooperation and in particular judicial dialogue plays a role in determining the impact of the case law across Member States. When defining the impact of CJEU it is very relevant the dialogical structure that operates between the courts. There is not only one dialogue. There are different forms of dialogue between national courts and CJEU depending on which court is referring, whether the subject matter of interpretation is a rule or a principle, how the preliminary reference is framed, how the decision in the judgment is framed. Different framings result in different dialogues.
Published Version
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 call