Dialogue between the Slovenian Highest Courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union

Author:

Novak Marko

Abstract

The relationship between European Union (EU) law and national Slovenian law progressed across three different stages starting from the beginning of this century to date, as discussed by EU and Slovenian legal theorists. The first one, just before Slovenia’s entry into the EU, considered the EU an international organisation and EU law a type of public international law. It was dismissed even before Slovenia joined the EU, with an amendment to the Constitution, and was succeeded by the second, supranationalist, view that required maximum restraint by national courts while dealing with EU issues. Finally, about a decade ago, the third pluralist view of EU law vis-à-vis national law emerged, calling the particularly highest national courts to enter a more critical dialogue with the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Although Slovenian theorists have been actively discussing the relationship between EU and national law before and immediately after Slovenia joined the EU, it seems that practising lawyers and judges needed time to adapt to the new law. Finally, in 2009, the first reference for a preliminary ruling was made by Slovenian courts. Soon after, the Slovenian Supreme Court made its first preliminary ruling reference and, in nearly 20 years since, proved itself to be the most frequent interlocutor with the CJEU from Slovenia. It regularly cites CJEU cases in its case laws, and demands that lower courts follow them wherever appropriate. From the highest national courts in Slovenia, the Constitutional Court joined the dialogue with the CJEU last. It has made four preliminary ruling references to the CJEU and demonstrated restraint vis-à-vis reviewing legal issues touching upon EU law. The legal culture (including public opinion) in Slovenia has predominantly been pro-EU. This applies to the internal legal culture, namely lawyers who support liberal democratic values such as the rule of law, human rights, and democracy. As long as the EU remains dedicated to these values, in such an environment, the highest Slovenian courts are not expected to show a bolder attitude vis-à-vis CJEU case law

Publisher

Central European Journal of Comparative Law

Reference30 articles.

1. Accetto, M. (2010a) ‘Slovenska nadrejenost v pravu EU (1): V iskanju pravnih virov’ Ius-Info [Online]. Available at: https://www.iusinfo.si/medijsko-sredisce/kolumne/50858 (Accessed: 26 June 2023).

2. Accetto, M. (2010b) ‘Slovenska nadrejenost v pravu EU (2): Sodstvo kot neprebojni jopič slovenske zakonodaje?’ Ius-Info [Online]. Available at: https://www.insolvinfo.si/medijsko-sredisce/dnevni-izbor/51159 (Accessed: 26 June 2023).

3. Avbelj, M. (2020a) ‘Revolucionarno dogajanje v Evropski uniji’ Ius-Info [Online]. Available at: https://www.iusinfo.si/medijsko-sredisce/kolumne/265026 (Accessed: 26 June 2023).

4. Avbelj, M. (2020b) ‘Slovenija pred Sodiščem Evropske unije’ Ius-Info [Online]. Available at: https://www.iusinfo.si/medijsko-sredisce/kolumne/276609 (Accessed: 12 September 2023).

5. Avbelj, M. (2011) ‘Supremacy or Primacy of EU Law – (Why) Does it matter?’, European Law Journal, 17(6), pp. 744–¬763; https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2011.00560.x

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3