Suchergebnisse

Chapter 1 Introduction -- Chapter 2 The Foundation and Structuring of the Powers of the Court -- Chapter 3 The Appointment of Members of the Court -- Chapter 4 The Deliberation of the Court and its Transparency -- Chapter 5 Docket Control at the Court of Justice -- Chapter 6 The Style of Court Decisions -- Chapter 7 Conclusions

Abstract
This paper starts with a general contextualisation of how Canadian constitutional law acquired an important role in global constitutional conversations in recent decades. It then considers, in particular, the well-known Canadian Living tree doctrine as a model of evolutionary constitutional interpretation, and argues that it is a relevant case study for our purposes since it is able to precisely link the 'history, evolution, influence and reform' of constitutional law in a comprehensive doctrine. The doctrine's comparative influence will be analysed in particular: the Living tree is especially relevant, since its comparative influence is traceable both in the work of courts that are historical participants in transnational judicial conversations, and courts that are new players in the game.

Abstract
The paper deals with the validity of constitutional pluralism as a constitutional theory for the European Union and a paradigm for the understanding of EU law in the current times of crisis. It reconstructs the way in which constitutional pluralism came to the fore, the different ways in which the theory was presented, and considers historical criticism it has faced. It then looks at the anomalies that, allegedly, cannot be explained today by constitutional pluralism as a paradigm, linked to the current economic and political crises in the Union. The reconstruction of the debate is complemented with reflections on both the descriptive and normative validity of EU constitutional pluralism's claims.

Defence date: 29 February 2016 ; Examining Board: Professor Loïc Azoulai, European University Institute; Professor Bruno De Witte, European University Institute; Professor Giuseppe Martinico, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna - Pisa; Professor Laurent Pech, Middlesex University London. ; The dissertation aims at studying the historical institutional evolution of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the judicial arm of the supranational European community. The Court has been largely analysed, in the multidisciplinary field of European studies, particularly because of its central role in the process of continental integration, for the role played for the evolution of the European Union legal order. The perspective I would like to suggest and to develop in this work tries to differentiate itself by taking a somehow reverse standpoint. First, I will focus on the evolution of the Court itself, more than on the impressive evolution of the EU legal order and its judge-made nature. Naturally, this last aspect will be the background of my analysis. In this respect, I will not be much concerned with the evolution of case law, jurisprudence or the interpretative activity of the European Court but more on the structure and the organization of the Court itself, taken as an institution. Finally, I will try to develop this approach by making use of the precious insights provided by the comparative analysis of law. I will select some specific yet central aspects of the structural, organizational, institutional development of the Court in the decades since its foundation and will do this with a purpose. My aim is to show, through a comparative analysis, how the development and institutional evolution of the Court of Justice of the European Union can be considered mimetic - able to engage and somehow internalize the solicitations which came from EU Member States influences of different legal traditions (with increasing strain as the EU grew dimensionally) and responding to global challenges in relation to the increasing role of the international forms of judicial review and of the international judicial review bodies. This proved decisive, I argue, for strengthening the authority of the Court of Justice in its federal judicial architecture.

This paper was first delivered at a conference held at the European University Institute in October 2014 presenting some initial results of the project on Constitutional Change through Euro Crisis Law. ; Most constitutions foresee a 'state of emergency' associated with the existence of an armed conflict. Paradoxically, modern societies seem to be permanently confronted with genuine emergencies increasingly removed from the threat of actual, physical violence. The Eurozone crisis can be said to have accentuated this, as the immense pressures from financial markets have turned the control of public finances into a struggle for the survival of the affected States. The present paper explores the legal manifestations of emergency in the domestic law of Greece, Italy, Spain and Ireland. These countries have all been hit by the Eurozone crisis (albeit in different manners) and have had to accommodate external oversight in their crisis management. The adoption of emergency measures for tackling the economic upheavals has been diverse across the case studies, although all have in common the emergence of a prominent role for the executive in the aftermath of the Eurozone crisis.