Effectiveness versus Procedural Protection

Dr. Allison Östlund

doi:10.5771/9783748901143

Zusammenfassung

Die Arbeit untersucht das Spannungsfeld zwischen einem fairen Resultat und Fairplay im Rechtsverfahren. Bislang hat der Europäische Gerichtshof es traditionell abgelehnt, hier eine klare Wahl zu treffen, indem er sich in Vorabentscheidungen im Zusammenhang mit der ex officio-Überprüfung weitgehend dem nationalen Recht unterwirft. Diese Arbeit zeigt, dass spezifische Schutzvorrechte zunehmend substantiell korrekte Urteile hervorgebracht haben, während ein neuer Grundrechtsansatz den individuellen Verfahrensschutz nicht gefördert hat.

Publikation durchsuchen

Bibliographische Angaben

Copyrightjahr: 2019
Erscheinungsdatum: 29.10.2019
ISBN-Print: 978-3-8487-6004-6
ISBN-Online: 978-3-7489-0114-3
Verlag: Nomos, Baden-Baden
Reihe: Luxemburger Juristische Studien - Luxembourg Legal Studies
Band: 19
Sprache: Englisch
Seiten: 325
Produkttyp: Monographie

Inhaltsverzeichnis

KapitelSeiten

Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis Kein Zugriff Seiten 1 - 18
1. 1.1 Research objectives Kein Zugriff
2. 1.2 Delimitations and structure Kein Zugriff
1. 1. 2.1.1 Legal foundations of the principle of national procedural autonomy Kein Zugriff
  2. 2.1.2 National institutional autonomy Kein Zugriff
  3. 2.1.3 Procedural, remedial and institutional rules vs. substantive rules Kein Zugriff
2. 1. 2.2.1 Legal basis in the duty of sincere co-operation or primacy Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 2.2.2.1 “Insofar as no provisions of Community law are relevant…” Kein Zugriff
    2. 2.2.2.2 Proposed legal bases for EU procedural competence Kein Zugriff
  3. 1. 2.2.3.1 What to do in the meantime: Implied competence? Kein Zugriff
    2. 2.2.3.2 The duty of sincere co-operation to fill the shoes of direct effect Kein Zugriff
    3. 2.2.3.3 From consistent interpretation to legal protection of individual rights Kein Zugriff
    4. 2.2.3.4 The principle of Rewe-equivalence Kein Zugriff
    5. 2.2.3.5 The principle of Rewe-effectiveness Kein Zugriff
    6. 2.2.3.6 Assessing procedural obstacles in light of their role and function Kein Zugriff
    7. 2.2.3.7 Linking the remedial mandate to effective judicial protection Kein Zugriff
3. 1. 2.3.1 Evolution of the principle of effective judicial protection Kein Zugriff
  2. 2.3.2 Enjoyment of rights cannot be effective unless protected by courts Kein Zugriff
  3. 2.3.3 Mere access is not enough: Requirements on the judiciary Kein Zugriff
  4. 2.3.4 The creation of new remedies to ensure de facto judicial protection Kein Zugriff
  5. 2.3.5 Convergence of effectiveness and effective judicial protection Kein Zugriff
4. 2.4 Interim conclusions Kein Zugriff
1. 1. 3.1.1 The “poor client” dilemma – ex officio review for the protection of the procedurally weaker litigant Kein Zugriff
  2. 3.1.2 The “savvy lawyer” dilemma – safeguarding mandatory law in the public interest Kein Zugriff
  3. 3.1.3 The objective of the proceedings – truth-seeking or dispute resolution? Kein Zugriff
  4. 3.1.4 The type of court proceedings – greater need for intervention in vertical litigation? Kein Zugriff
  5. 3.1.5 Even if the court knows the law, how can it know the facts? Kein Zugriff
  6. 3.1.6 Ex officio review – in the service or disservice of the right to a fair trial under the ECHR? Kein Zugriff
2. 1. 1. 3.2.1.1 Empowering national courts to co-operate with the Court of Justice to ensure the full effectiveness of Union law Kein Zugriff
    2. 3.2.1.2 An embryonic power of ex officio review Kein Zugriff
    3. 3.2.1.3 Power or obligation of ex officio review for national courts? Kein Zugriff
    4. 3.2.1.4 Legal bases for the constitutional and Rheinmühlen mandates Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 3.2.2.1 Obligation of ex officio review under Peterbroeck Kein Zugriff
    2. 3.2.2.2 Discretion under national law triggering Union obligation of ex officio review Kein Zugriff
    3. 3.2.2.3 Rule-of-reason for weighing procedural protection against effectiveness Kein Zugriff
    4. 3.2.2.4 Reconciling Peterbroeck and van Schijndel Kein Zugriff
    5. 3.2.2.5 Use it or lose it: Litigants’ procedural omissions Kein Zugriff
    6. 3.2.2.6 Protection of individuals against enforcement of EU law Kein Zugriff
  3. 1. 3.2.3.1 Identifying procedural public policy via mandatory contract law Kein Zugriff
    2. 3.2.3.2 Public policy in ordinary courts’ review of arbitration awards Kein Zugriff
    3. 3.2.3.3 Procedural public policy in the case-law of the Court of Justice Kein Zugriff
  4. 1. 3.2.4.1 Origins of the Union mandate of ex officio review in consumer litigation Kein Zugriff
    2. 3.2.4.2 Substantive scope of the ex officio mandate Kein Zugriff
    3. 3.2.4.3 Ex officio review as mandatory Union mandate Kein Zugriff
    4. 3.2.4.4 Consumer protection as Union public policy Kein Zugriff
    5. 3.2.4.5 A fundamental rights approach to justifications Kein Zugriff
    6. 3.2.4.6 Rationale and reach of the consumer protection prerogative Kein Zugriff
3. 3.3 Interim conclusions Kein Zugriff
1. 4.1 Tracing beneficiaries through the protective scope of substantive rights Kein Zugriff
2. 4.2 Beneficiaries of effectiveness under the ex officio mandate Kein Zugriff
3. 1. 4.3.1 Financially weak beneficiaries of EU law Kein Zugriff
  2. 4.3.2 Legal bases for protecting procedurally vulnerable beneficiaries Kein Zugriff
  3. 4.3.3 Responsibility for litigation lapses by the EU law beneficiary Kein Zugriff
4. 4.4 Interim conclusions Kein Zugriff
1. 1. 5.1.1 Complementarity between Rewe-effectiveness and effective judicial protection Kein Zugriff
  2. 5.1.2 Components of effective judicial protection Kein Zugriff
2. 1. 5.2.1 Procedural protection vs. (other) procedural protection Kein Zugriff
  2. 5.2.2 Procedural protection vs. effectiveness of EU substantive law Kein Zugriff
  3. 5.2.3 Individual procedural protection vs. effectiveness of EU procedural mechanisms Kein Zugriff
3. 1. 5.3.1 Justifications for procedural obstacles based on the rule-of-reason Kein Zugriff
  2. 5.3.2 Art. 53 CFR and the level of effective judicial protection Kein Zugriff
  3. 5.3.3 Art. 52(1) CFR and modulation of judicial protection in EU secondary law Kein Zugriff
  4. 5.3.4 Balancing effectiveness against legal certainty under the full effect approach Kein Zugriff
4. 5.4 Interim conclusions Kein Zugriff
1. 6.1 Ex officio review: Striking a balance between substantive and procedural protection Kein Zugriff
2. 6.2 Beneficiaries of ex officio review and effective judicial protection Kein Zugriff
3. 6.3 Effective judicial protection: Striking a balance between substantive and procedural protection Kein Zugriff
4. 6.4 Procedural harmonization of the principle of party disposition? Kein Zugriff
5. 6.5 Looking ahead Kein Zugriff
Bibliography Kein Zugriff Seiten 295 - 325

Literaturverzeichnis (233 Einträge)

Andrews, Neil H., English Civil Procedure: Fundamentals of the New Civil Justice System (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003). Google Scholar öffnen
Beka, Anthi, The Active Role of Courts in Consumer Litigation. Applying EU Law of the National Courts’ Own Motion (Cambridge: Intersentia, 2018). Google Scholar öffnen
Bernitz, Ulf, and Anders Kjellgren, Europarättens grunder (Vällingby: Norstedts juridik AB, 2007). Google Scholar öffnen
Bertrand, Brunesse, Le juge de l’Union européenne, juge administratif (Brussels: Bruylant, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Cadiet, Loïc, Jacques Normand, Soraya Amrani-Mekki, and Jacques Normand, Théorie générale du procès (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Claes, Monica, The National Courts’ Mandate in the European Constitution (Oregon: Hart Publishing, 2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Corrias, Luigi, The Passivity of Law. Competence and Constitution in the Court of Justice (Amsterdam: Springer, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Corthaut, Tim, EU Ordre Public (Croydon: Kluwer Law International, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Craig, Paul, and Gráinne de Búrca, EU Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. 5 edn. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011 a). Google Scholar öffnen
Craig, Paul, EU Administrative Law. Vol. 2 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Diesen, Christian, and Annika Lagerqvist Veloz Roca, Bevis 7: Bevisprövning i förvaltningsmål (Stockholm: Norstedts juridik, 2003). Google Scholar öffnen
Dougan, Michael, National Remedies before the Court of Justice: Issues of Harmonisation and Differentiation, Modern studies in European law (Oxford: Hart, 2004). Google Scholar öffnen
Douglas-Scott, Sionaidh, Constitutional Law of the European Union (Harlow: Longman, 2002). Google Scholar öffnen
Ekelöf, Per Olof, and Henrik Edelstam, Rättegång: Första häftet (Stockholm: Norstedts Juridik, 2002). Google Scholar öffnen
Ergec, Rusen, and Jacques Velu, Convention européenne des droits de l’homme (Brussels: Bruylant, 2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Esaiasson, Peter, Mikael Gilljam, Henrik Oscarsson, and Lena Wängnerud, Metodpraktikan. Konsten att studera samhälle individ och marknad. 2 edn. (Stockholm: Nordstedts Juridik, 2004). Google Scholar öffnen
von Essen, Ulrik, Processramen i förvaltningsmål: ändring av talan och anslutande frågor (Stockholm: Norstedts juridik, 2009). Google Scholar öffnen
Galetta, Diana-Urania, Procedural Autonomy of EU Member States: Paradise Lost? A Study on the “Functionalized Procedural Competence” of EU Member States (Heidelberg: Springer, 2010). Google Scholar öffnen
Gilliaux, Pascal, Droit(s) européen(s) à un procès équitable (Brussels: Bruylant, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Gray, John Chipman, The Nature and Sources of the Law. Vol. 2 (New York: Macmillan, 1921). Google Scholar öffnen
Harris, David, Michael O’Boyle, Edward Bates, and Carla Buckley, Harris, O’Boyle & Warbrick: Law of the European Convention on Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009). Google Scholar öffnen
Hay, Colin, Political Analysis. A Critical Introduction (Hampshire: Palgrave, 2002). Google Scholar öffnen
Hofmann, Herwig C.H., Gerard C. Rowe, and Alexander Türk, Administrative Law and Policy of the European Union (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Jans, Jan H., Roel de Lange, Sacha Prechal, and Robert J. G. M. Widdershoven, Europeanisation of Public Law (Groningen: Europa Law Publishing, 2007). Google Scholar öffnen
Kaczorowska-Ireland, Alina, European Union Law (Routledge, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Klamert, Marcus, The Principle of Loyalty in EU Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Lenaerts, Koen, Ignace Maselis, and Kathleen Gutman, EU Procedural Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Lind, Allan, and Tom Tyler, The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice (New York: Plenum Press, 1988). Google Scholar öffnen
Motulsky, Henri, Gérard Cornu, Jean Foyer, Berthold Goldman, and Philippe Fouchard, Ecrits (Paris: Dalloz, 1973). Google Scholar öffnen
Paunio, Elina, Legal Certainty in Multilingual EU Law: Language, Discourse and Reasoning at the European Court of Justice (New York: Routledge, 2016). Google Scholar öffnen
Prechal, Sacha, Directives in EC Law. 2 edn (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005). Google Scholar öffnen
Robberstad, Anne, Mellom tvekamp og inkvisisjon: straffeprosessens grunnstruktur belyst ved fornærmedes stilling (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1998). Google Scholar öffnen
Schermers, Henry G., and Denis Waelbroeck, Judicial Protection in the European Union. 6 edn. (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2001). Google Scholar öffnen
Schütze, Robert, European Constitutional Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Schütze, Robert, European Union Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Storskrubb, Eva, Civil Procedure and EU Law: A Policy Area Uncovered (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008). Google Scholar öffnen
Tridimas, Takis, and Paolisa Nebbia, European Union Law for the Twenty-First Century. Rethinking the New Legal Order. Vol. 1. Constitutional and Public Law External Relations (Oregon: Hart Publishing, 2004). Google Scholar öffnen
Tridimas, Takis, The General Principles of EU Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Wallerman, Anna, Om fakultativa regler. En studie av svensk och unionsrättslig reglering av skönsmässigt beslutsfattande i processrättsliga frågor (Uppsala: Iustus förlag, 2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Ward, Angela, Judicial Review and the Rights of Private Parties in EC Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000). Google Scholar öffnen
Wejedal, Sebastian, and Allison Östlund, Advokatens roll. Om ändamålsenlig rollfördelning i mål om tvångsvård av barn (Stockholm: Santérus, 2016). Google Scholar öffnen
Wennerås, Pål, The Enforcement of EC Environmental Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007). Google Scholar öffnen
Werlauff, Erik, Common European Procedural law. European Law requirements imposed on national administration of Justice (Gylling: DJOF Publishing Copenhagen 1999). Google Scholar öffnen
Westberg, Peter, Civilrättskipning (Stockholm: Norstedts juridik, 2013). Google Scholar öffnen
White, Robin C. A., and Claire Ovey, Jacobs, White & Ovey: The European Convention on Human Rights. 5 edn. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010). Google Scholar öffnen
Wilman, Folkert, Private Enforcement of EU Law before National Courts: The EU Legislative Framework (Northampton: Elgar European Law and Practice, 2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Edited books and book chapters Google Scholar öffnen
Andrews, Neil H., ‘Nurturing Civil Justice’, in Festschrift für Rolf Sturner zum 70. Geburtstag. 2. Teilband, eds. Bruns, A., C. Kern, J. Münch, A. Piekenbrock, A. Stadler and D. Tsikrikas (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013), 1393. Google Scholar öffnen
Arabadjiev, Alexander, Marko Pavliha, Marko Ilešič, Ada Polajnar-Pavčnik, and Boštjan Koritnik, eds., Challenges of Law in Life Reality, Liber Amicorum Marko Ilešič (Ljublana: Pravna faculteta Univerze v Ljubljani, 2017). Google Scholar öffnen
Arnull, Anthony, ‘Judicial Activism and the European Court of Justice: How Should Academics Respond?’, in Judicial Activism at the European Court of Justice, eds. de Witte, B., E. Muir and M. Dawson (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Arnull, Anthony, Catherine Barnard, Michael Dougan, and Eleanor Spaventa, eds., A Constitutional Order of States? Essays in EU Law in Honour of Alan Dashwood (Cornwall: Hart Publishing, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Avbelj, Matej, and Jan Komárek, eds., Constitutional Pluralism in the European Union and Beyond (Portland: Hart Publishing, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Barnard, Catherine and Okeoghene Odudu, eds., The Outer Limits of European Law (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2009). Google Scholar öffnen
Barnard, Catherine, ed., The Fundamentals of EU Law Revisited: Assessing the Impact of the Constitutional Debate (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007). Google Scholar öffnen
Bobek, Michal, ‘Why There is no Principle of ‘Procedural Autonomy’ of the Member States’, in The European Court of Justice and the Autonomy of the Member States, eds. de Witte, B. and H. Micklitz (Antwerp: Intersentia, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Brenninkmeijer, Alex Franciscus Maria, ‘The Influence of Court of Justice Case Law on the Procedural Law of the Member States’, in Administrative Law Application and Enforcement of Community Law in the Netherlands, eds. Vervaele, J. A. E. and K.-A. Andrean-Gellert (Deventer-Boston: Kluwer Law and Taxation Publ., 1994). Google Scholar öffnen
Brownsword, Roger, Hans-W Micklitz, Leone Niglia, and Stephen Weatherill, eds., The Foundations of European Private Law (Oxford: Hart, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Bruns, Alexander, Christoph Kern, Joachim Münch, Astrid Stadler, Andreas Piekenbrock, and Dimitrios Tsikrikas, eds., Festschrift für Rolf Stürner zum 70. Geburtstag (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013). Google Scholar öffnen
de Búrca, Grainne, ‘National Procedural Rules and Remedies: The Changing Approach of the Court of Justice’, in Remedies for Breach of EC Law, eds. Lonbay, J. and A. Biondi (Michigan: John Wiley & Sons, 1997). Google Scholar öffnen
Caoimh, Aindrias Ó, ‘Issues of EU Law Raised by National Courts of their Own Motion’, in Constitutionalising the EU Judicial System: Essays in Honour of Pernilla Lindh, eds. Cardonnel, P., A. Rosas and N. Wahl (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
van Cleynenbreugel, Pieter, ‘Effectiveness through fairness? ‘Due process’ as an institutional precondition for effective decentralized EU competition law enforcement’, in Procedural Fairness in Competition Proceedings, eds. Nihoul, P. and T. Skoczny (Northhampton: Elward Elgar, 2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Craig, Paul, and Gráinne de Búrca, eds., The Evolution of EU Law, Vol. 2 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011 b). Google Scholar öffnen
Cremona, Marise, ed., Compliance and the Enforcement of EU Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
da Cruz Vilaça, José Luís, ‘Le principe de l’effet utile du droit de l’Union dans la jurisprudence de la Cour’, in The Court of Justice and the Construction of Europe: Analyses and Perspectives on Sixty Years of Case-Law (The Hague: Asser press, 2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Dougan, Michael, ‘In Defence of Mangold?’, in A Constitutional Order of States?, eds. Arnull, A., C. Barnard, M. Dougan and E. Spaventa (Cornwall: Hart Publishing, 2011 b). Google Scholar öffnen
Dougan, Michael, ‘The Vicissitudes of Life at the Coalface: Remedies and Procedures for Enforcing Union Law before the National Courts’, in The Evolution of EU Law, eds. Craig, P. and G. de Búrca (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011 a). Google Scholar öffnen
Drake, Sara, ‘More Effective Private Enforcement of EU Law Post-Lisbon: Aligning Regulatory Goals and Constitutional Values’, in New Directions in the Effective Enforcement of EU Law and Policy, eds. Drake, S. and M. Smith (Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016). Google Scholar öffnen
Dubos, Olivier, ‘Que reste-t-il de l’autonomie procédurale du juge national ? Histoire de l’attribution d’une compétence au nom de l’effectivité et de l’efficacité du droit de l’Union’, in Renvoi préjudiciel et marge d’appréciation du juge national, ed. Neframi, E. (Brussels: Larcier, 2015 a). Google Scholar öffnen
Hartkamp, Arthur S., Martijn Hesselink, Ewoud H Hondius, Chantal Mak, and Edgar du Perron, eds., Towards a European Civil Code. Vol. 4 (Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Hofmann, Herwig C.H., ‘Effective Judicial Remedies Before the National Courts’ in The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, eds. A. Ward, S. Peers, T. Harvey and J. Kenner, (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2014 a). Google Scholar öffnen
Hofmann, Herwig C.H., ‘The International Market in a Context of Deepening Integration – Long on Content and Short on Modes of Delivery?’, in Of Courts and Constitutions: Liber Amicorum in Honour Of Nial Fennelly, eds. Bradley, K., N. Travers, A. Whelan and N. Fennelly (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2014 b). Google Scholar öffnen
Jolowicz, John A., ‘Da mihi factum dabo tibi jus: A Problem of Demarcation in English and French Law’, in On Civil Procedure, ed. Jolowicz, J. A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). Google Scholar öffnen
Jolowicz, John A., ‘Substantive and Procedural Justice in Civil Litigation: A Measure of the Role of Civil Litigation’, in De tous horizons. Mélanges Xavier Blanc-Jouvan, ed. Fauvarque-Cosson, B. (Paris: Société de législation comparée, 2005). Google Scholar öffnen
Jones, Clifford A., ‘Into the Parallel Universe: Procedural Fairness in Private Litigation after the Damages Directive’ in Procedural Fairness in Competition Proceedings, eds. Nihoul, P. and T. Skozcy (Cheltenham: Elgar, 2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Law, Stephanie, ‘The Transformation of Consumer Law in Times of Crisis: The Ex Officio Control of Unfair Contract Terms’, in Transformation of Civil Justice, eds. Uzelac A. and C. van Rhee (Chem: Springer, 2018). Google Scholar öffnen
Leczykiewicz, Dorota, ‘Effectiveness of EU Law before National Courts: Direct Effect, Effective Judicial Protection, and Member State Liability’, in Oxford Handbook of European Union Law, eds. Arnull, A. and D. Chalmers (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Lindahl, Hans, ‘Discretion and Public Policy: Timing the Unity and Divergence of Legal Orders’, in The Coherence of EU law, eds. Prechal, S. and B. van Roermund (New York: 2008). Google Scholar öffnen
Lindholm, Johan, ‘‘DCFR, Please Meet National Procedure’: Enforcing the Frame of Reference Using National Procedural Law’, in The Foundations of European Private Law, eds. Brownsword, R., H.-W. Micklitz, L. Niglia and S. Weatherill (Oxford: Hart, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Loos, Marco, ‘Individual Private Enforcement of Consumer Rights in Civil Courts in Europe’, in The Foundations of European Private Law, eds. Brownsword, R., H.-W. Micklitz, L. Niglia and S. Weatherill (Oxford: Hart, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
MacQueen, Hector L., ‘Illegality and Immorality in Contracts: Towards European Principles’, in Towards a European Civil Code, eds. Hartkamp, A. S., M. Hesselink, E. H. Hondius, C. Mak and E. du Perron (Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Meij, Arjen, ‘The Rules of the Game. Party Autonomy in the EU Courts’, in De Regels en het Spel, Opstellen over Recht, Filosofie, Literatuur en Geschiedenis aangeboden aan Tom Eijsbouts, eds. J-H. Reestman, A. Schrauwen, M. van Montfrans and J.H. Jans (The Hague: Asser, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Micklitz, Hans-Wolfgang, and Bruno de Witte, eds., The European Court of Justice and the Autonomy of the Member States (Cambridge: Intersentia, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Neframi, Eleftheria, ‘Exigence de cohérence et action extérieure de l’Union européenne’, in Le Droit, les Institutions et les politiques de l’Union européenne face à l’impératif de coherence, ed. V. Michel (Strasbourg: Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg, 2009). Google Scholar öffnen
Neframi, Eleftheria, ‘La force intégrative du statut de l'Etat membre sur la fonction juridictionnelle’, in Le statut d'Etat membre de l'Union européenne, ed. Potvin-Solis, L. (Brussels: Bruylant, 2018). Google Scholar öffnen
Neframi, Eleftheria, ‘La rôle du juge national dans le cadre du renvoi préjudiciel : une marge d’appréciation?’, in Renvoi préjudiciel et marge d’appréciation du juge national, ed. Neframi, E. (Brussels: Larcier, 2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Neframi, Eleftheria, ‘Quelques réflexions sur l’article 19, paragraphe 1, alinéa 2, TUE et l’obligation de l’État membre d’assurer la protection juridictionnelle effective’, in La Constitution, l’Europe et le droit, Mélanges en l’honneur de Jean-Claude Masclet, ed. Boutayeb, C. (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Neframi, Eleftheria, ed., Renvoi préjudiciel et marge d’appréciation du juge national (Brussels: Larcier, 2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Neframi, Eleftheria, and Mauro Gatti, ‘Autonomy and EU Competences in the Context of Free Trade Investment Agreements’, in Negotiation and Conclusion of the New Generation Trade Agreements, eds. I. Bosse Platière and C. Rapoport (Edward Elgar, forthcoming 2019). Google Scholar öffnen
Nihoul, Paul, and Tadeusz Skozcy, eds., Procedural Fairness in Competition Proceedings (Cheltenham: Elgar, 2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Peters, Christopher J, ‘Legal Formalism, Procedural Principles, and Judicial Constraint in American Adjudication’, in General Principles of Law – The Role of the Judiciary, ed. Pineschi, L. (Switzerland: Springer, 2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Pineschi, Laura, ed., General Principles of Law – The Role of the Judiciary (Switzerland: Springer, 2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Piquani, Darinka, ‘The Role of National Courts in Issues of Compliance’, in Compliance and the Enforcement of EU Law, ed. Cremona, M. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Plender, Richard, ‘The Role of National Judges in Implementing Uniform Rules of Jurisdiction and Choice of Law in the European Union’, in A Constitutional Order of States? Essays in EU Law in Honour of Alan Dashwood, eds. Arnull, A., C. Barnard, M. Dougan and E. Spaventa (Cornwall: Hart Publishing, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Potvin-Solis, Laurence, ed., Le statut d'Etat membre de l'Union européenne (Brussels: Bruylant, 2018). Google Scholar öffnen
Prechal, Sacha, ‘Between Effectiveness, Procedural Autonomy and Judicial Protection’, in Challenges of Law in Life Reality, Liber Amicorum Marko Ilešič, eds. Alexander Arabadjiev, A., M. Pavliha, M. Ilešič; A. Polajnar-Pavčnik and B. Koritnik (Ljublana: Pravna faculteta Univerze v Ljubljani, 2017 a). Google Scholar öffnen
Prechal, Sacha, ‘Direct effect, indirect effect, supremacy and the evolving constitution of the European Union’, in The Fundamentals of EU Law Revisited: Assessing the Impact of the Constitutional Debate, ed. Barnard, C. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007). Google Scholar öffnen
Prechal, Sacha, ‘The Court of Justice and Effective Judicial Protection: What Has the Charter Changed?’, in Fundamental Rights in International and European Law, eds. Paulussen, C., T. Takácz, V. Lazić and B. van Rompuy (The Hague: Springer, 2016). Google Scholar öffnen
Prechal, Sacha, and Rob Widdershoven, ‘Effectiveness or Effective Judicial Protection: A Poorly Articulated Relationship’, in Today’s Multi-layered Legal Order: Current Issues and Perspectives, ed. Baumé, T. (Paris: Zutphen, 2011 a). Google Scholar öffnen
Ravo, Linda Maria, ‘The Role of the Principle of Effective Judicial Protection in the EU and its Impact on National Jurisdictions’, in Sources of Law and Legal Protection (Trieste: Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Reestman, Jan-Herman, Annette Schrauwen, Manet van Montfrans, and Jan H. Jans, eds., De Regels en het Spel, Opstellen over Recht, Filosofie, Literatuur en Geschiedenis aangeboden aan Tom Eijsbouts (The Hague: Asser Press, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Reich, Norbert, ‘Legal protection of individual and collective consumer interests’, in European Consumer Law, eds. Reich, N., H. Micklitz, P. Rott and K. Tonner (Cambridge: Intersentia, 2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Reich, Norbert, Hans-Wolfgang Micklitz, Peter Rott, and Klaus Tonner, eds., European Consumer Law (Cambridge: Intersentia, 2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Rosas, Allan, ‘The National Judge as EU Judge: Opinion 1/09’, in Constitutionalising the EU Judicial System. Essays in Honour of Pernilla Lindh, eds. Cardonnel, P., A. Rosas and N. Wahl (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Rosas, Allan, Egils Levits, and Yves Bot, eds., La Cour de Justice et la Construction de l’Europe : Analyses et Perspectives de Soixante Ans de Jurisprudence (The Hague: Asser Press, 2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Schütze, Robert, ‘Federalism as Constitutional Pluralism: ‘Letter from America’’, in Constitutional Pluralism in the European Union and Beyond, eds. Avbelj M. and J. Komárek, (Portland: Hart Publishing, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Skouris, Vassilios, ‘The Principle of Procedural Autonomy and the Duty of Loyal Cooperation of National Judges under Article 10 EC’, in Tom Bingham and the Transformation of the Law: A Liber Amicorum, eds. Andenæs, M. T., D. Fairgrieve, B. Markesinis, E. McKendrick and S. B. A. Rix (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009). Google Scholar öffnen
St Clair Bradley, Kieran, ‘Powers and Procedures in the EU Constitution: Legal Bases and the Court’, in The Evolution of EU Law, eds. Craig, P. and G. de Búrca (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Vahlne Westerhäll, Lotta, ed., Tvångsvård och psykisk ohälsa (Gothenburg: School of Business, Economics and Law, Legal Publications series 012, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Vesterdorf, Bo, ‘Le relevé d’office par le juge communautaire’ in Une Communauté de Droit. Festschrift für Gil Carlos Rodríquez Iglesias, eds. Colneric, N., D. Edward, J.-P. Puissochet and D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer (Berlin: Berliner Wissenschafts-Verlag, 2003). Google Scholar öffnen
Wallerman, Anna, ‘Manoeuvering Procedural Autonomy in Sweden: Is Materielle Prozessleitung the Answer?’, in Procedural autonomy: Room for Manoeuvre, eds. Nylund, A. and B. Krans (Intersentia, forthcoming 2019). Google Scholar öffnen
Weatherill, Stephen, ‘Interpretation of the Directives: The Role of the Court’, in Towards a European Civil Code, eds. Hartkamp, A. S., M. Hesselink, E. H. Hondius, C. Mak and E. du Perron (Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer, 2011). Google Scholar öffnen
de Witte, Bruno, ‘Treaty Revision Procedures after Lisbon’, in EU Law after Lisbon, eds. Biondi, A., P. Eeckhout and S. Ripley (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Zetterquist, Ola, ‘Out with the New, in with the Old – Neo-Roman Constitutional Thought and the Enigma of Constitutional Pluralism in the EU’, in Constitutional pluralism in the European Union and beyond, eds. Avbelj, M. and Komárek, J. (Portland: Hart Publishing, 2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Ziller, Jacques, ‘Les concepts d’administration directe, d’administration indirecte et de co-administration et les fondements du droit administratif européen’, in Traité de droit administratif européen, eds. Auby, J.-B. and J. Dutheil de la Rochère (Brussels: Bruylant, 2007). Google Scholar öffnen
Journal articles and papers Google Scholar öffnen
Accetto, Matej, and Stefan Zleptnig, ‘The Principle of Effectiveness: Rethinking Its Role in Community Law’, European Public Law, 11 (2005), 375. Google Scholar öffnen
Andrews, Neil H., ‘The Passive Court and Legal Argument’, C.J.Q., 7 (1988), 125. Google Scholar öffnen
Arnull, Anthony, ‘The Beat Goes On’, E.L. Rev., 12 (1987), 56. Google Scholar öffnen
Arnull, Anthony, ‘The Principle of Effective Judicial Protection in EU law: An Unruly Horse?’, E.L. Rev., 36 (2011), 51. Google Scholar öffnen
Barents, René, ‘EU Procedural Law and Effective Legal Protection’, CMLR, 51 (2014), 1462. Google Scholar öffnen
Beka, Anthi, ‘Commentary Note on Case C-618/10 Banco Español de Crédito SA v. Joaquín Calderón Camino, Judgment of 14 June 2012’, Zeitschrift für Gemeinschaftsprivatrecht, 9 (2012), 326. Google Scholar öffnen
Beyer-Katzenberger, Malte, ‘Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint at the Bundesverfassungs-gericht: Was the Mangold Judgment of the European Court of Justice an Ultra Vires Act?’, ERA Forum, 11 (2011), 517. Google Scholar öffnen
Biondi, Andrea, ‘Effectiveness Versus Efficiency: Recent Developments on Judicial Protection in EC Law’, European Public Law, 6 (2000), 311. Google Scholar öffnen
Bobek, Michal, ‘Cartesio – Appeals Against an Order to Refer under Article 234 (2) EC Treaty Revisited’, C.J.Q., 29 (2010), 307. Google Scholar öffnen
Boccaccini, Marcus, Jennifer Boothby, and Stanley Brodsky, ‘Development and Effects of Client Trust in Criminal Defense Attorneys: Preliminary Examination of the Congruence Model of Trust Development’, Behav. Sci. Law, 22 (2004), 197. Google Scholar öffnen
van den Bossche, Anne-Marie, ‘Private Enforcement, Procedural Autonomy and Article 19(1) TEU: Two’s Company, Three’s a Crowd’, YEL, 33 (2014), 41. Google Scholar öffnen
Bossuyt, Marc, and Willem Verrijdt, ‘The Full Effect of EU Law and of Constitutional Review in Belgium and France after the Melki Judgment’, ECL, 7 (2011), 355. Google Scholar öffnen
Broberg, Morten, ‘National Courts of Last Instance Failing to Make a Preliminary Reference: The (Possible) Consequences Flowing Therefrom’, European Public Law, 22 (2016), 243. Google Scholar öffnen
Brulard, Yves, and Yves Quintin, ‘European Community Law and Arbitration – National Versus Community Public Policy’, J. Int’l Arb., 18 (2001), 533. Google Scholar öffnen
Buhai, Sande, ‘Access to Justice for Unrepresented Litigants: A Comparative Perspective’, Loy. L.A. L. Rev., 42 (2008), 979. Google Scholar öffnen
de Búrca, Gráinne, ‘The Legal Effects of Directives: Policy, Rules and Exceptions’, ELR, 34 (2009), 349. Google Scholar öffnen
Burley, Anne-Marie, and Walter Mattli, ‘Europe before the Court: A Political Theory of Legal Integration’, International Organization, 47 (1993), 41-76. Google Scholar öffnen
Cafaggi, Fabrizio, ‘Towards Collaborative Governance of European Remedial and Procedural law’, Theoretical Inquiries in Law, 19 (2018), 235. Google Scholar öffnen
Cazet, Safia, ‘Le relevé d’office et la protection du justiciable’, Revue du droit de l’Union européenne, 3 (2017), 53. Google Scholar öffnen
Chayes, Abram, ‘The Role of the Judge in Public Law Litigation’, Harv. L. Rev., 89 (1976), 1281. Google Scholar öffnen
Claes, Monica, ‘Constitutionalizing Europe at its Source: The ‘European Clauses’ in the National Constitutions: Evolution and Typology’, YEL, 24 (2005), 81. Google Scholar öffnen
van Cleynenbreugel, Pieter, ‘“Meroni” Circumvented? Article 114 TFEU and EU Regulatory Agencies’, MJECL, 21 (2014), 64. Google Scholar öffnen
van Cleynenbreugel, Pieter, ‘Judge-Made Standards of National Procedure in the Post-Lisbon Constitutional Framework’, E.L. Rev., 12 (2012 a), 90. Google Scholar öffnen
van Cleynenbreugel, Pieter, ‘The Confusing Constitutional Status of Positive Procedural Obligations in EU Law’, REALaw, 5 (2012 b), 81. Google Scholar öffnen
Couronne, Vincent, ‘L’autonomie procédurale des États membres de l’Union européenne à l’épreuve du temps’, Cah. dr. eur., 46 (2010), 273. Google Scholar öffnen
Coutron, Laurent, ‘Cour de Justice, 13 janvier 2004, Kühne & Heitz NV/Productschap voor Pluimvee en Eieren’, Rev. Aff. Eur., 13 (2003-2004), 417. Google Scholar öffnen
Craig, Paul, ‘The ECJ and Ultra Vires Action: A Conceptual Analysis’, CMLR, 48 (2011), 395. Google Scholar öffnen
Davidson, Jenny M., ‘The Full Effect of Community Law – An Increasing Encroachment upon National Law and Principles’, REALaw, 1 (2008), 113. Google Scholar öffnen
Dederke, Julian, and Daniel Naurin, ‘Friends of the Court? Why EU governments file observations before the Court of Justice’, EJPR (2017), 1. Google Scholar öffnen
Díez-Picazo, L.M., ‘Towards a Unified Judicial Protection in Europe (?)’, ERPL, 9 (1997), 975. Google Scholar öffnen
Dougan, Michael, ‘Who Exactly Benefits from the Treaties? The Murky Interaction Between Union and National Competence over the Capacity to Enforce EU Law’, Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 12 (2012), 73. Google Scholar öffnen
Dubey, Bernard, ‘Administration indirecte et fédéralisme d’exécution en Europe’, Cah. dr. eur., 39 (2003), 87. Google Scholar öffnen
Dubos, Olivier, ‘The Origins of the Proceduralisation of EU Law: A Grey Area of European Federalism’, REALaw, 8 (2015 b), 7. Google Scholar öffnen
Dubout, Edouard, ‘Le niveau de protection des droits fondamentaux dans l’Union européenne : unitarisme constitutif versus pluralisme constitutionnel – Réflexions autour de l’arrêt Melloni’, Cah. dr. eur., 49 (2013), 293. Google Scholar öffnen
Düsterhaus, Dominik, ‘Procedural Primacy and Effective Judicial Protection – A Trilogue. Case C-112/13 A v. B and Others, EU:C:2014:2195’, MJECL, 23 (2016), 317. Google Scholar öffnen
Ebers, Martin, ‘ECJ (First Chamber) 6 October 2009, Case C-40/08, Asturcom Telecomunicaciones SL v. Cristina Rodríguez Nogueira – From Océano to Asturcom: Mandatory Consumer Law, Ex Officio Application of European Union Law and Res Judicata’, Eur. Rev. Pr. L. (2010), 823. Google Scholar öffnen
Efrat, Asif, ‘Assessing Mutual Trust among EU Members: Evidence from the European Arrest Warrant’, JEPP (2018), https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2018.1478877, 1. Google Scholar öffnen
Eliantonio, Mariolina, ‘Case C-240/09, Lesoochranárske zoskupenie VLK v. Ministerstvo životného prostredia Slovenskej republiky, Judgment of the Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) of 8 March 2011’, CMLR, 49 (2012), 767. Google Scholar öffnen
Eliantonio, Marioloina, ‘The Application of EC Law Ex Officio – Some News from the Italian Administrative Courts’, REALaw, 1 (2008), 101. Google Scholar öffnen
Eliantonio, Mariolina, ‘The Future of National Procedural Law in Europe: Harmonisation vs. Judge-Made Standards in the Field of Administrative Justice’, EJCL (2009), 1. Google Scholar öffnen
Engström, Johanna, ‘Effektivt rättsskydd i förvirring - Nationell process- och sanktionsrätt i ljuset av C-253/00 Muñoz’, ERT, 1 (2003), 167. Google Scholar öffnen
Engström, Johanna, ‘National Courts’ Obligation to Apply Community Law Ex Officio – The Court Showing New Respect for Party Autonomy and National Procedural Autonomy?’, REALaw, 1 (2008), 67. Google Scholar öffnen
Engström, Johanna, ‘The Principle of Effective Judicial Protection after the Lisbon Treaty. Reflection in the Light of Case C-279/09 DEB Deutsche Energiehandels- und Beratungsgesellschaft mbH’, REALaw, 4 (2011), 53. Google Scholar öffnen
Ereciński, Tadeusz, ‘When Must National Judges Raise European Law Issues on Their Own Motion?’, ERA Forum, 11 (2011), 525. Google Scholar öffnen
Franck, Jens-Uwe, ‘Rights, remedies and effective enforcement in air transportation: Ruijsenaars. Joined Cases C-145/15 and C-146/15, K. Ruijssenaars and Others v. Staatssecretaris van Infrastructuur en Milieu, Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 17 March 2016, EU:C:2016:187’, CMLR, 54 (2017), 1867. Google Scholar öffnen
Fuller, Lon L., ‘The Forms and Limits of Adjudication’, Harv. L. Rev., 92 (1978), 353. Google Scholar öffnen
Galetta, Diana-Urania, ‘The Jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice on the Procedural Autonomy of EU Member States’, Ius Publicum Network Review (2011), 1. Google Scholar öffnen
Gattinara, Giacomo, and Fabrice Picod, ‘L’autorité de la chose jugée après l’arrêt Pizzarotti’, Rev. Aff. Eur., 3 (2014), 623. Google Scholar öffnen
Gerbrandy, Anna, ‘The Dual Identity of National Judges in the EU and the Implausibility of Uniform and Effective Application of European Law throughout the European Union’, REALaw, 7 (2014), 33. Google Scholar öffnen
van Gerven, Walter, ‘Of Rights, Remedies and Procedures’, CMLR, 37 (2000), 501. Google Scholar öffnen
Graf, Bernd U., and Arthur E. Appleton, ‘Elisa Marioa Mostaza Claro v. Centro Móvil Milenium: EU Consumer Law as a Defence against Arbitral Awards, ECJ Case C-168/05’, ASA Bulletin, 25 (2007), 48. Google Scholar öffnen
Groussot, Xavier, and Timo Minssen, ‘Res Judicata in the Court of Justice Case-Law: Balancing Legal Certainty with Legality’, ECL, 3 (2007), 385. Google Scholar öffnen
Groussot, Xavier, ‘Spirit, Are You There? Reinforced Judicial Dialogue and the Preliminary Ruling Procedure’, The Eric Stein Working Papers (2008), 1. Google Scholar öffnen
Groussot, Xavier, Gunnar Thor Petursson, and Jörgen Hettne, ‘General Principles and the Many Faces of Coherence: Between Law and Ideology in the European Union’, Lund University Legal Research Paper Series (2016), 1. Google Scholar öffnen
Hacker, Philipp, and Max Fabian Starke, ‘European Union Litigation’, European Review of Contract Law, 12 (2016), 141. Google Scholar öffnen
Hallberg, Jonas, and Östlund, Allison, ‘Början på slutet för skiljeförfaranden i internationella investeringsskyddsavtal? EU-domstolens avgörande i Achmea’, JT, 4 (2017/2018), 841. Google Scholar öffnen
Hancox, Emily, ‘Meaning of Implementing EU Law under Article 51 (1) of the Charter: Åkerberg Fransson’, CMLR, 50 (2013), 1411. Google Scholar öffnen
van Harten, Herman, ‘National Judicial Autonomy: The Example of National European Law Precedents in the Dutch Case-Law on the Free Movement of Services and the Freedom of Establishment’, REALaw, 2 (2009), 135. Google Scholar öffnen
Heukels, Ton, ‘Joined Cases C-430/93 and C-431/93, van Schijndel and van Veen v. Stichting Pensioenfonds voor Fysiotherapeuten; and Case C-312/93, Peterbroeck, van Campenhout & Cie SCS v. Belgian State, Both Judgments of the Court of 14 December 1995 (Full Court)’, CMLR, 33 (1996), 337. Google Scholar öffnen
Hinton, Eric F, ‘Strengthening the Effectiveness of Community Law: Direct Effect, Article 5 EC, and the European Court of Justice’, JILP, 31 (1998), 307. Google Scholar öffnen
Hofmann, Herwig C.H., ‘Legislation, Delegation and Implementation under The Treaty of Lisbon: Typology Meets Reality’, European Law Journal, 15 (2009), 482. Google Scholar öffnen
Hoskins, Mark, ‘Tilting the Balance, Supremacy and National Procedural Rules’, E.L. Rev., 21 (1996), 365. Google Scholar öffnen
Houyet, Yves, ‘L’application d’office du droit de l’Union européenne par les juges nationaux’, J.D.E., 3 (2010), 69. Google Scholar öffnen
Jans, Jan H., and Albert. T. Marseille, ‘Joined Cases C-222-225/05, Van der Weerd and others v. Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit, Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 7 June 2007, [2007] ECR I-14233’, CMLR, 234 (2009), 853. Google Scholar öffnen
Kakouris, Constantinos, ‘Do the Member States Possess Judicial Procedural “Autonomy”?’, CMLR, 34 (1997), 1389. Google Scholar öffnen
Kitsos, John, ‘Public Procurement – Meaning of ‘Public Works Contract’ – Scope of the Principle of ‘Res Judicata’’, Eur. Procurement & Pub. Private Partnership L. Rev., 10 (2015), 207. Google Scholar öffnen
Kleist, David, and Sebastian Wejedal, ‘Tala är silver, tiga är guld. Om muntlig förhandling i förvaltningsmål, särskilt i skattemål’, FT, 4 (2013), 345. Google Scholar öffnen
Kmiec, Keenan D, ‘The Origin and Current Meanings of “Judicial Activism”’, CLR, 92 (2004), 1441. Google Scholar öffnen
Komninos, Assimakis P., ‘New Prospects for Private Enforcement of EC Competition Law: Courage v. Crehan and the Community Right to Damages’, CMLR, 39 (2002), 447. Google Scholar öffnen
Krommendijk, Jasper, ‘Is There Light on the Horizon? The Distinction Between “Rewe Effectiveness” and the Principle of Effective Judicial Protection in Article 47 of the Charter after Orizzonte’, CMLR, 53 (2016), 1395. Google Scholar öffnen
Lang, John Temple, ‘The Duties of National Authorities under Community Constitutional Law’, E.L. Rev., 23 (1998), 109. Google Scholar öffnen
de Lange, Roel, ‘The European Public Order, Constitutional Principles and Fundamental Rights’, Erasmus Law Review, 1 (2007), 4. Google Scholar öffnen
Lauwaars, Richard, ‘The Application of Community Law by National Courts Ex Officio’, Fordham International Law Journal, 31 (2007), 1161. Google Scholar öffnen
Mahlmann, Matthias, ‘The Politics of Constitutional Identity and its Legal Frame – the Ultra Vires Decision of the Federal Constitutional Court’, German Law Journal, 11 (2010), 1407. Google Scholar öffnen
Mann, Frederick A., ‘Fusion of the Legal Professions?’, Law Quarterly Review, 93 (1977), 367. Google Scholar öffnen
Martin, Raymond M., ‘La crise du contradictoire entre juge et avocat’, La Gazette du Palais, 1 (1978), 419. Google Scholar öffnen
le Masson, Jean-Marc, ‘La recherche de la vérité dans le procès civil’, Droit et société, 38 (1998), 21. Google Scholar öffnen
Mohr, Pamela, ‘Report of the Working Group on the Allocation of Decision Making’, Fordham Law Review, 64 (1996), 1325. Google Scholar öffnen
Mounts, Suzanne E, ‘Public Defender Programs, Professional Responsibility, and Competent Representation’, Wisconsin Law Review (1982), 473. Google Scholar öffnen
Nebbia, Paolisa, ‘The Double Life of Effectiveness’, Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 10 (2008), 287. Google Scholar öffnen
Neframi, Eleftheria, ‘L’État membre au service de l’Union’, Annuaire de droit européen 2004 (2006), 51. Google Scholar öffnen
Neframi, Eleftheria, ‘Principe de coopération loyale et principe d’attribution dans le cadre de la mise en œuvre du droit de l’Union’, Cah. dr. eur., 1 (2016), 221. Google Scholar öffnen
Nový, Zdeněk, ‘Arbitration Clause as Unfair Contract Term: Some Observations on the ECJ’s Claro case’, Cofola, 1 (2008), 76. Google Scholar öffnen
Ortlep, Rolf, and Maartje Verhoeven, ‘The Principle of Primacy Versus the Principle of National Procedural Autonomy’, Netherlands Administrative Law Library, April-June (2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Prechal, Sacha, ‘Community Law in National Courts: The Lessons from van Schijndel’, CMLR, 35 (1998), 681. Google Scholar öffnen
Prechal, Sacha, ‘Does Direct Effect Still Matter?’, CMLR, 37 (2000), 1047. Google Scholar öffnen
Prechal, Sacha, ‘Mutual Trust Before the Court of Justice of the European Union’, Mutual Recognition and Mutual Trust: Reinforcing EU Integration? (Second Part) European Papers, 2 (2017 b), 75. Google Scholar öffnen
Prechal, Sacha, and Kees Cath, ‘The European Acquis of Civil Procedure: Constitutional Aspects’, Uniform Law Review – Revue de droit uniforme, 19 (2014), 179. Google Scholar öffnen
Prechal, Sacha, and Natalya Shelkoplyas, ‘National Procedures, Public Policy and EC Law. From Van Schijndel to Eco Swiss and Beyond’, Eur. Rev. Pr. L., 5 (2004), 589. Google Scholar öffnen
Prechal, Sacha, and Widdershoven, Rob, ‘Redefining the Relationship between “Rewe-effectiveness” and Effective Judicial Protection’, REALaw, 4 (2011 b), 31. Google Scholar öffnen
Ritleng, Dominique, ‘De l’articulation des systèmes de protection des droits fondamentaux dans l’Union. Les enseignements des arrêts Akerberg Fransson et Melloni’, Revue trimestrielle de droit européen, 49 (2013), 267. Google Scholar öffnen
Roeben, Volker, ‘Judicial Protection as the Meta-Norm in the EU Judicial Architecture’, Hague J Rule Law (2019), https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-019-00085-3, 1. Google Scholar öffnen
Šadl, Urška, ‘The Role of Effet Utile in Preserving the Continuity and Authority of European Union Law: Evidence from the Citation Web of the Pre-Accession Case Law of the Court of Justice of the EU’, European Journal of Legal Studies, 8 (2015), 18. Google Scholar öffnen
Šadl, Urška, and Sabine Mair, ‘Mutual Disempowerment: Case C-441/14 Dansk Industri, acting on behalf of Ajos A/S v Estate of Karsten Eigil Rasmussen and Case no. 15/2014 Dansk Industri (DI) acting for Ajos A/S v The estate left by A’, ECL, 13 (2017), 347. Google Scholar öffnen
Safjan, Marek, and Dominik Düsterhaus, ‘A Union of Effective Judicial Protection: Addressing a Multi-level Challenge through the Lens of Article 47 CFREU’, YEL (2014), 1. Google Scholar öffnen
Sandefur, Rebecca, ‘Effects of Representation on Trial and Hearing Outcomes in Two Common Law Countries’, International Sociological Association, (2005), 1. Google Scholar öffnen
Sandefur, Rebecca, ‘The Impact of Counsel: An Analysis of Empirical Evidence’, Seattle Journal for Social Justice, 9 (2010), 51. Google Scholar öffnen
Sandin, Erik, ‘Åberopsbörda i mål om offentlig upphandling? Två steg framåt, ett steg bakåt’, JT, 10 (2009), 917. Google Scholar öffnen
Schebsta, Hanna, ‘Does the National Court Know European Law? A Note on Ex Officio Application after Asturcom’, Eur. Rev. Pr. L., 4 (2010), 847. Google Scholar öffnen
Shin, Hyan S., ‘Adversarial and Inquisitorial Procedures in Arbitration’, The RAND Journal of Economics, 29 (1998), 378. Google Scholar öffnen
Simon, Denys, ‘Autorité de chose jugée des décisions juridictionnelles nationales’, Europe, 10 (2016). Google Scholar öffnen
Simon, Denys, ‘Les fondements de l’autonomie du droit communautaire’, Droit international et droit communautaire. Perspectives actuelles (2000), 228. Google Scholar öffnen
Smith, Susie, ‘Impresa Pizzarotti v. Comune di Bari (Case C-213/13): Is a Contract for the Leasing of a Building which has not yet been Built a Works Contract, and must a National Court Revisit a Ruling which has led to a Situation which is Incompatible with EU Procurement Legislation?’, Public Procurement Law Review (2014), 171. Google Scholar öffnen
Snyder, Francis, ‘The Effectiveness of European Community Law: Institutions, Processes, Tools and Techniques’, The Modern Law Review, 56 (1993), 19. Google Scholar öffnen
Spigelman, James, ‘Judicial Accountability and Performance Indicators’, C.J.Q., 21 (2002), 18. Google Scholar öffnen
Thibaut, John, and Laurens Walker, ‘A Theory of Procedure’, CLR, 66 (1978). Google Scholar öffnen
Timmerman, Mikhel, ‘Balancing Effective Criminal Sanctions with Effective Fundamental Rights Protection in Cases of VAT Fraud: Taricco’, CMLR, 53 (2016), 779. Google Scholar öffnen
de la Torre, Fernando Castillo, ‘Le relevé d’office par la juridiction communautaire’, Cah. dr. eur., 41 (2005), 395. Google Scholar öffnen
Tridimas, Takis, ‘Constitutional Review of Member State Action: The Virtues and Vices of an Incomplete Jurisdiction’, I•CON, 9 (2012), 737. Google Scholar öffnen
Tulibacka, Magdalena, ‘Proceduralisation of EU Consumer Law and its Impact on European Consumers’, REALaw, 8 (2015), 51. Google Scholar öffnen
Wallerman, Anna, ‘Överklagande av beslut att begära förhandsavgörande: Några reflektioner med anledning av EFTA-domstolens avgörande i Irish Bank’, ERT, 2 (2013), 308. Google Scholar öffnen
Wallerman, Anna, ‘Towards an EU Law Doctrine on the Exercise of Discretion in National Courts? The Member States’ Self-Imposed Limits on National Procedural Autonomy’, CMLR, 53 (2016), 339. Google Scholar öffnen
Ward, Angela, ‘Effective Sanctions in EC Law: A Moving Boundary in the Division of Competence’, ELJ, 1 (1995), 205. Google Scholar öffnen
Warin, Catherine, ‘Individual Rights and Collective Interests in EU Law: Three Approaches to a Still Volatile Relationship’, CMLR, 56 (2019), 463. Google Scholar öffnen
Wattel, Peter J., ‘National Procedural Autonomy and Effectiveness of EC Law: Challenge the Charge, File for Restitution, Sue for Damages?’, LIEI, 35 (2008), 109. Google Scholar öffnen
Whittaker, Simon, ‘Who Determines What Civil Courts Decide? Private Rights, Public policy and EU Law’, Oxford Legal Research Paper Series, 46 (2012). Google Scholar öffnen
de Wilmars, J. Mertens, ‘L’efficacité des différentes techniques nationales de protection juridique contre les violations du droit communautaire par les autorités nationales et les particuliers’, Cah. dr. eur. (1981), 379. Google Scholar öffnen
Östlund, Allison, and Jonas Hallberg, ‘Kan nya EU-domar läggas till grund för förnyad prövning av slutgiltiga internationella skiljedomar?’, JT, 3 (2018/19), 675. Google Scholar öffnen