Vol. 13 (2024)
Precedent in EU Law: The Linguistic Aspect

Special Issues

De Facto Precedent at the Court of Justice of the European Union

Published 15.07.2024

  • Gar Yein Ng

Abstract

This paper seeks to demonstrate that although there is no official doctrine of precedent in judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the research affirms that there is a de facto system of precedent. This means that whilst, de jure, there is no official precedent status of the case law of the CJEU, the Court does give precedential value to its own case law through interpretive practices to ensure the uniform application of law and legal certainty throughout the Member States of the European Union (EU). When one looks at the elements of precedent it is apparent that this goes beyond its legal value (i.e. authority or bindingness) or conscious jurisprudential choice – language also plays a role. This article will examine discussions and models of precedent in common law and civil law legal systems in both theory and practice, before going on to examine the theories and practices of precedent at the CJEU.

Cite as: Ng, JLL 13 (2024), 28–49, DOI: 10.14762/jll.2024.028

Keywords

precedent, common law, civil law, CJEU, interpretation

PDF

References

  1. Algero, Mary G. (2005). The Sources of Law and the Value of Precedent: A Comparative and Empirical Study of a Civil Law State in a Common Law Nation. Louisiana Law Review, 65(2), 775–822.
  2. Arnull, Anthony (2006). The Normative Status of the Case Law. The European Union and Its Court of Justice. 2nd Edition. Oxford: University Press.
  3. Barzun, Charles (2013). Impeaching Precedent. University of Chicago Law Review, 80(4), 1625–1681.
  4. Beck, Gunnar (2012). The Legal Reasoning of the Court of Justice of the EU. 1st Edition. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
  5. Broberg, Morten & Fenger, Niels (2021). When Are National Courts Obliged to Refer Questions? In Broberg & Fenger (Eds.), Broberg and Fenger on Preliminary References to the European Court of Justice (pp. 201–248). Oxford: University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198843580.003.0006.
  6. Camarena González, Rodrigo (2016). From Jurisprudence Constante to Stare Decisis: The Migration of the Doctrine of Precedent to Civil Law Constitutionalism. Transnational Legal Theory, 7(2), S. 257–286. DOI: 10.1080/20414005.2016.1205871.
  7. Court of Justice of the European Union. Language Arrangements. CURIA. Available at: 158.167.241.123:8090/jcms/jcms/Jo2_10739/en/ (accessed 15 August 2023).
  8. Derlén, Mattias (2015). A Single Text or a Single Meaning: Multilingual Interpretation of EU Legislation and CJEU Case Law in National Courts. In Šarčević (Ed.), Language and Culture in EU Law: Multidisciplinary Perspectives (pp. 53–72). Farnham: Ashgate.
  9. Derlén, Mattias & Lindholm, Johan (2017). Peek-A-Boo, It’s a Case Law System! Comparing the European Court of Justice and the United States Supreme Court from a Network Perspective. German Law Journal, 18(3), 647–686. DOI: 10.1017/S2071832200022100.
  10. Domingues, Joana S. (2017). The Multilingual Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice and the Idea of Uniformity in European Union Law. UNIO – EU Law Journal, 3(2), 125–138. DOI: 10.21814/unio.3.2.10.
  11. Edlin, Douglas E. (Ed.) (2007). Common Law Theory. Cambridge: University Press.
  12. Eisenhower, James J. III (1988). Four Theories of Precedent and Its Role in Judicial Decisions. Temple Law Review, 61, 871–878.
  13. Fon, Vincy & Parisi, Francesco (2006). Judicial Precedents in Civil Law Systems: A Dynamic Analysis. International Review of Law and Economics, 26(4), 519–535. DOI: 10.1016/j.irle.2007.01.005.
  14. Gerhardt, Michael J. (2008). The Power of Precedent. New York: Oxford University Press.
  15. Jacob, Marc A. (2014). Precedents and Case-based Reasoning in the European Court of Justice: Unfinished Business. Cambridge: University Press.
  16. Jeuland, Emmanuel (2018). The Quality of Adjudication in France. In Bencze & Ng (Eds.), How to Measure the Quality of Judicial Reasoning (pp. 141–154). Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-97316-6_9.
  17. Lasser, Mitchel de S. O.-L’E. (2004). Judicial Deliberations: A Comparative Analysis of Judicial Transparency and Legitimacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
  18. Leung, Janny H. C. (2019). Shallow Equality and Symbolic Jurisprudence in Multilingual Legal Orders. New York: Oxford University Press.
  19. Manchester, Colin & Salter, David (2006). Exploring the Law: The Dynamics of Precedent and Statutory Interpretation. London: Sweet & Maxwell.
  20. McAuliffe, Karen (2011). Hybrid Texts and Uniform Law? The Multilingual Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 24(1), 97–115. DOI: 10.1007/s11196-010-9188-3.
  21. McAuliffe, Karen (2012). Language and Law in the European Union: The Multilingual Jurisprudence of the ECJ. In Solan & Tiersma (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law (pp. 200–216). Oxford: University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199572120.013.0015.
  22. McAuliffe, Karen (2013). Precedent at the Court of Justice of the European Union: The Linguistic Aspect. In Freeman & Smith (Eds.), Law and Language. Current Legal Issues Volume 15. Oxford: University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199673667.003.0297.
  23. McAuliffe, Karen (2017). Behind the Scenes at the Court of Justice: Drafting EU Law Stories. In Davies & Nicola (Eds.), EU Law Stories: Contextual and Critical Histories of European Jurisprudence (pp. 35–57). Cambridge: University Press. DOI: 10.1017/9781316340479.003.
  24. McKean, Frederick G. (1928). The Rule of Precedents. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 76(5), 481–497. DOI: 10.2307/3307653.
  25. Pierdominici, Leonardo (2020). The Mimetic Evolution of the Court of Justice of the EU. A Comparative Law Perspective. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
  26. Pin, Andrea & Genova, Francesca M. (2019). The Duty to Disclose Adverse Precedents: The Spirit of the Common Law and Its Enemies. Yale Journal of International Law, 44(2), 239–280.
  27. Rowe, Malcolm & Katz, Leanna (2020). A Practical Guide to Stare Decisis. Windsor Review of Legal and Social Issues, 41, 1–27.
  28. Tjong Tjin Tai, Eric & Teuben, Karlijn (2008). European Precedent Law. European Review of Private Law, 16(5), 827–841. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1148115.
  29. Vajda, Christopher (2018). Special Supplement: The Common Law and the CJEU. Common Law Review, 15, 4–15.
  30. van Harten, Herman (2009). National European Law Precedents. Discussion Paper for REALAW Research Forum Top-Down and Bottom-Up Groningen, 3 June 2009, 1–27. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1414829.
  31. Joined Cases 28–30/62, Da Costa et al. v Netherlands Inland Revenue Administration [1963] ECR 31.
  32. Case 283/81, CILFIT v Ministry of Health [1982] ECR 3415.
  33. Case C-6&9/90 Francovich v. Italy [1991] ECR I-5357.
  34. BVerfG, Judgment of the Second Senate of 5 May 2020 ‒ 2 BvR 859/15 ‒, paras. 1‒237. Available at:
  35. bverfg.de/e/rs20200505_2bvr085915en.html (accessed 15 July 2024).