Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  judicial dialogue
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Postavení Nejvyššího soudu v právním státě a jeho role při sjednocování judikatury

100%
Šámal P.
Právník. Teoretický časopis pro otázky státu a práva (The Lawyer - Scientific Review for Problems of State and Law)
|
2018
|
vol. 157
|
issue 4
283-302
EN
This article focuses on the position of the Supreme Court in the Czech judicial system from the perspective of its role in the unification of case law. It is divided into three separate parts examining the relationship between i) the Supreme Court and the Court of Justice of the EU and the European Court of Human Rights, ii) the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, iii) the Supreme Court and lower courts. Purpose of the article rests, besides the theoretical grasp of the issue, in pointing out the individual practical overlaps of the subject matter. In the context of examining the relationship between the Supreme Court, the Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights, the author highlights the importance of the Supreme Court in facilitating the correct application of the case law of these courts and gives due regard to the selected aspects of the judicial dialogue. Within the analysis of the relationship between the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, emphasis is placed on the issue of the tension between the declared and the actual scope of judicial review carried out by the Constitutional Court. At the same time, a brief comparative excursion to the German doctrine defining the relationship between the Federal Court of Justice and the Federal Constitutional Court is presented. In dealing with the relationship between the Supreme Court and the lower courts, attention is paid to individual modes of unification of case law.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

International Courts, Unrecognised Entities and Individuals: Coherence through Judicial Dialogue?

72%
Czaplińska A.
Polish Yearbook of International Law
|
2019
|
vol. 39
61-87
EN
The article offers a revisited look at the classic jurisprudence of the ECtHR and CJEU concerning the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus from the perspective of the phenomenon of judicial dialogue. In this context, it aims to examine whether judicial dialogue contributes to the development of coherent jurisprudence and in consequence of effective judicial redress in cases involving unrecognised entities and individuals. It draws attention to the threats for both the international rule of law and the protection of rights of individuals resulting from inconsistencies within own jurisprudence of the respective court, as well as from lack of coherence in interpretation and application of the same rules of international law by different courts.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Pytania prejudycjalne Naczelnego Sądu Administracyjnego: aspekt proceduralny i gwarancyjny

44%
Kalisz A., Chmielarz-Grochal A.
Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny
|
2023
|
vol. 85
|
issue 4
5-25
EN
The research problem is preliminary protection as a preventive action of the court which can protect the individual from violation of their rights. Preliminary questions can be considered a mechanism for effective legal protection of the individual. The judicial dialogue initiated by preliminary questions has, apart from determining the result of a particular case, a twofold effect: building up the acquis de l’Union and influencing national law and its application. The aim of this article is to examine the preliminary procedure: firstly from a national perspective, secondly from administrative courts perspective, and thirdly from the perspective of the Supreme Administrative Court as a court “against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law”. The paper covers the normative basis for preliminary questions (in the context of the principles of EU law and the paradigm of co-application of European and national law), and then selected examples of the use of this mechanism by the SAC. The text is dominated by the dogmatic-legal method and thus involves an analysis of legal provisions and the relevant case law. It concludes that the experience of the SAC confirms that, in cooperation with the CJEU, it effectively performs its task of ensuring respect for the law while interpreting and applying the EU treaties. It makes legitimate use of the preliminary ruling procedure, which confirms the role of the national court as an EU court. The questions and case law following preliminary rulings contribute to the development of the acquis in the various areas covered by the jurisdiction of the administrative courts. Therefore, the issue in question – together with the practical scheme of the preliminary ruling procedure – is important, and the updated 'review' of the case law of the SAC constitutes an element of novelty.
PL
Artykuł dotyczy zagadnienia ochrony prejudycjalnej, oznaczającej działanie sądu w trybie prewencyjnym, co może uchronić jednostkę przed naruszeniem jej praw. Pytania prejudycjalne można uznać za mechanizm skutecznej ochrony prawnej jednostki. Inicjowany przez pytania prejudycjalne dialog sądowy ma, oprócz wpływu na wynik konkretnej sprawy, dwojaki skutek: buduje acquis de l’Union oraz wpływa na prawo krajowe i jego stosowanie. Celem artykułu jest spojrzenie na pytania prejudycjalne: (1) z perspektywy krajowej, (2) sądowoadministracyjnej oraz (3) z pozycji Naczelnego Sądu Administracyjnego jako sądu, którego orzeczenia „nie podlegają zaskarżeniu według prawa wewnętrznego”. Analizie poddano podstawy normatywne pytań prejudycjalnych (w kontekście zasad prawa UE oraz modelu współstosowania prawa unijnego z krajowym), a następnie wybrane przypadki wykorzystania tego mechanizmu przez NSA. Przeprowadzona analiza przepisów oraz relewantnego orzecznictwa prowadzi do konkluzji, że doświadczenia NSA potwierdzają, że we współpracy z Trybunałem Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej skutecznie realizuje zadania służące zapewnieniu poszanowania prawa w wykładni i stosowaniu traktatów. Sąd ten korzysta z procedury prejudycjalnej w sposób uzasadniony, co potwierdza rolę sądu krajowego jako sądu unijnego. Pytania prawne i orzecznictwo wydawane w następstwie orzeczeń prejudycjalnych stanowią wkład w rozwój unijnego acquis w różnorodnych dziedzinach podlegających kognicji sądów administracyjnych. Dlatego analizowane zagadnienie – wraz z praktycznym schematem procedury prejudycjalnej – jest istotne, a zaktualizowany „przegląd” orzecznictwa NSA stanowi element nowatorski.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.