IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jcmkts/v54y2016i6p1449-1464.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why is the Court of Justice of the European Union not more Contested? Three Mechanisms of Opposition Abatement

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Werner

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Werner, 2016. "Why is the Court of Justice of the European Union not more Contested? Three Mechanisms of Opposition Abatement," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(6), pages 1449-1464, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:54:y:2016:i:6:p:1449-1464
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/jcms.12438
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Garrett, Geoffrey, 1995. "The politics of legal integration in the European Union," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(01), pages 171-181, December.
    2. Abdul Ghafar Noury & Simon Hix & Gérard Roland, 2007. "Democratic politics in the European Parliament," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/7744, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Streeck, Wolfgang, 2001. "The transformation of corporate organization in Europe: An overview," MPIfG Working Paper 01/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    4. Mattli, Walter & Slaughter, Anne-Marie, 1995. "Law and politics in the European Union: a reply to Garrett," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(01), pages 183-190, December.
    5. Garrett, Geoffrey, 1992. "International cooperation and institutional choice: the European Community's internal market," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(2), pages 533-560, April.
    6. Sweet, Alec Stone, . "The European Court of Justice and the judicialization of EU governance," Living Reviews in European Governance (LREG), Institute for European integration research (EIF).
    7. Gibson, James L. & Caldeira, Gregory A., 1998. "Changes in the Legitimacy of the European Court of Justice: A Post-Maastricht Analysis," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 63-91, January.
    8. Werner, Benjamin, 2013. "Der Streit um das VW-Gesetz: Wie Europäische Kommission und Europäischer Gerichtshof die Unternehmenskontrolle liberalisieren," Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, volume 79, number 79.
    9. Stone Sweet, Alec & Brunell, Thomas, 2012. "The European Court of Justice, State Noncompliance, and the Politics of Override," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(1), pages 204-213, February.
    10. Alter, Karen J., 1998. "Who Are the “Masters of the Treaty”?: European Governments and the European Court of Justice," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(1), pages 121-147, January.
    11. Burley, Anne-Marie & Mattli, Walter, 1993. "Europe Before the Court: A Political Theory of Legal Integration," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(1), pages 41-76, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carsten Hefeker & Michael Neugart, 2016. "Policy deviations, uncertainty, and the European Court of Justice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 547-567, December.
    2. José Luis Castro-Montero & Edwin Alblas & Arthur Dyevre & Nicolas Lampach, 2018. "The Court of Justice and treaty revision: A case of strategic leniency?," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(4), pages 570-596, December.
    3. Andreas Grimmel, 2011. "Integration and the Context of Law: Why the European Court of Justice is not a Political Actor," Les Cahiers européens de Sciences Po 3, Centre d'études européennes (CEE) at Sciences Po, Paris.
    4. Mark A. Pollack, 2007. "The New Institutionalisms and European Integration," The Constitutionalism Web-Papers p0031, University of Hamburg, Faculty for Economics and Social Sciences, Department of Social Sciences, Institute of Political Science.
    5. Grimmel, Andreas, 2011. "Politics in robes? The European Court of Justice and the myth of judicial activism," Discussion Papers 2/11, Europa-Kolleg Hamburg, Institute for European Integration.
    6. Clifford J. Carrubba, 2003. "The European Court of Justice, Democracy, and Enlargement," European Union Politics, , vol. 4(1), pages 75-100, March.
    7. Dederke, Julian, 2014. "Bahnliberalisierung in der Europäischen Union: Die Rolle des EuGH als politischer und politisch restringierter Akteur bei der Transformation staatsnaher Sektoren," PIPE - Papers on International Political Economy 20/2014, Free University Berlin, Center for International Political Economy, revised 2014.
    8. Keith Dowding, 2000. "Institutionalist Research on the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 125-144, February.
    9. Susanne K. Schmidt, 2000. "Only an Agenda Setter?," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 37-61, February.
    10. Tridimas, George & Tridimas, Takis, 2004. "National courts and the European Court of Justice: a public choice analysis of the preliminary reference procedure," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 125-145, June.
    11. Schmidt, Susanne K., 1996. "Sterile debates and dubious generalisations: An empirical critique of European integration theory based on the integration processes in telecommunications and electricity," MPIfG Discussion Paper 96/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    12. Jean-Yves Pitarakis & George Tridimas, 2003. "Joint Dynamics of Legal and Economic Integration in the European Union," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 357-368, November.
    13. Nicole Lindstrom, 2010. "Service Liberalization in the Enlarged EU: A Race to the Bottom or the Emergence of Transnational Political Conflict?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(5), pages 1307-1327, November.
    14. Fritz W. Scharpf, 2009. "The Asymmetry of European Integration - or why the EU cannot be a Social Market Economy," KFG Working Papers p0006, Free University Berlin.
    15. Clifford J. Carrubba & Matthew Gabel, 2005. "Do Governments Sway European Court of Justice Decision-making?: Evidence from Government Court Briefs," Working Papers 2005-06, University of Kentucky, Institute for Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations.
    16. Nicolas Lampach & Arthur Dyevre, 2020. "Choosing for Europe: judicial incentives and legal integration in the European Union," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 65-86, August.
    17. Hristina RUNCHEVA TASEV & Milena APOSTOLOVSKA-STEPANOSKA & Leposava OGNJANOSKA, 2020. "Union based on the rule of law: the Court of Justice of the European Union and the (future of) European integration," Eastern Journal of European Studies, Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, vol. 11, pages 396-426, December.
    18. Wolf, Sebastian, 2011. "Euratom Before the Court: A Political Theory of Legal Non-Integration," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 15, December.
    19. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:48:y:2010:i::p:1307-1327 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Höpner, Martin & Schäfer, Armin, 2012. "Integration among unequals: How the heterogeneity of European varieties of capitalism shapes the social and democratic potential of the EU," MPIfG Discussion Paper 12/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    21. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2010. "Community and autonomy: Institutions, policies and legitimacy in multilevel Europe," Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, volume 68, number 68.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:54:y:2016:i:6:p:1449-1464. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-9886 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.