Book Review: The European Courts and National Courts
| Author | Roberto Caranta |
| Published date | 01 March 1999 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1023263X9900600107 |
| Date | 01 March 1999 |
| Subject Matter | Book Review |
Book Reviews
A nn e-M a rie Sl aug ht er, A l ec St on e S w ee t, Jo sep h H . H . W eil er (e d s. ),
The E uro pea n C ou rts a nd N atio na l Co ur ts, Ha rt Pu b lish in g, 19 9 8, x lii
+ 40 0 p a ge s, h ard ba ck, £ 3 7 ,5 0 .
This complex boo k revisits the relationships between the Euro pean Court of Justice and
Member States’ courts. As usual, the key questions facing national courts are supremacy
of EC and EU law over national law and direct effect.
The book is divided into two sections; the firs t section is devoted to national reports
from six Member States (the s ix founding States apart from Luxembourg, and the
United Kingdom); th e reports not only present the views and doctrines developed by the
courts but try to bring to th e surface the reasons behind national courts’ attitudes
towards E uropean integration. Th e second section contains horizontal c ontributions on
different aspects of the relationships between the European Court of Justice and Member
States courts. Dif ferent national attitudes are compared applying both legal analysis and
political sciences methods.
The first Member State dealt w ith is Belgium. Hervé Brib osia gives a detailed report
of the early acceptance of both supremacy and direct effect by ordinary and
administrative Belgian courts while at the same time pointing out possible second
thoughts by the new constitutional court, the C our d ’arbi trag e, which could result in the
denial o f the supremacy o f EC and EU law in so far as the Co nstitution is concerned.
The a uthor also considers the impact of European integration on a legal system which
knows bo th separation of powers and divided (federal) powe r. The French re port has
been written by Jens Plôtner. The progressive evolution from defiance to acceptance of
supremacy of EC/EU law is thoro ughly analyzed with reference to the case law of both
the ordinary courts and the C onsei l d ’Et at. The persistent hostility to the European
Court o f Justice case law on direct effect and the complex mechanisms devised by the
Co nsei l d ’Eta t to come to t he same practical results are examined as well. Jens Plôtner
then traces the reasons why the C ons eil d ’Etat has been less eager than the ordinary
courts to meet the needs of European integration and he pointedly recalls that ‘the new
M aîtr es d e requ ette s, the lowest rank within the C onse il d ’Eta t, are aware of being the
most excelle nt servants of French Grandeur' (p. 56). The German report deals mainly
with the case law of the Constitutional court, the Bundesverfassungsgericht. Juliane
Kokott recalls that the German Court played a pivotal role in convincing the European
Court o f Justice to emphasize the protection of fundamental rights, and shows how the
focus has shifted to democracy and so vereignty after the famous (or infamous)
M aas tric ht U rteil . The auth or shows how the German Constitutional Court tuned its
decisions to the prevailing national political moods. The two reports on Italy concentrate
mainly on the case law of the Co rte c osti tuzi ona le. They recall how the Court has stuck
during all these years to the dualist approach prevailing among Italia n international law
scholars. This notwithstanding, the Corte c ostit uzio nal e was in the end able to accept
supremacy o f EC/EU law even with regard to the national Constitution (w ith the sole
100 6 MJ 1 (1999)
To continue reading
Request your trial