IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v12y2024a7473.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Annulment Actions and the V4: Taking Legislative Conflicts Before the CJEU

Author

Listed:
  • Marton Varju

    (Institute for Legal Studies, HUN‐REN Centre for Social Sciences, Hungary)

  • Veronika Czina

    (Institute of World Economics, HUN‐REN Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, Hungary)

  • Katalin Cseres

    (Amsterdam Centre for European Law and Governance, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Ernő Várnay

    (Institute for Legal Studies, HUN‐REN Centre for Social Sciences, Hungary)

Abstract

The EU member states have been using the action for annulment to challenge the legality of EU measures while pursuing a range of non-legal and essentially political motivations. This also holds for the V4 member states, which have also resorted to annulment actions to judicialize their legislative conflicts within the EU before the CJEU. Among the V4, Poland has been the most frequent litigant, using this institutional tool increasingly actively during the last 10 years. Poland’s behavior appears to confirm expectations of differentiation among this group of member states. It also coincides with a period of political change marked by deep legislative conflicts within the EU. The V4 annulment challenges against EU legislative measures usually made a genuine effort to achieve the legal objective of annulling the challenged legal act. However, there is evidence that they also pursued certain political motivations or a combination of them. These could include the securing of gains in domestic politics, avoiding the local costs of an EU policy misfit and/or promoting a preferred policy position, and/or influencing EU competence arrangements. In a few cases, the litigant member state aimed to avoid concrete material disadvantages. Securing a legal interpretation from the CJEU that would influence the behavior of other EU actors or clarify the law affecting the position of the applicant member state also motivated some of the V4 legal challenges.

Suggested Citation

  • Marton Varju & Veronika Czina & Katalin Cseres & Ernő Várnay, 2024. "Annulment Actions and the V4: Taking Legislative Conflicts Before the CJEU," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 12.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v12:y:2024:a:7473
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.7473
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/7473
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.7473?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mattli, Walter & Slaughter, Anne-Marie, 1998. "Revisiting the European Court of Justice," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(1), pages 177-209, January.
    2. Vachudova, Milada Anna, 2005. "Europe Undivided: Democracy, Leverage, and Integration After Communism," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199241194.
    3. Miriam Hartlapp, 2018. "Power Shifts via the Judicial Arena: How Annulments Cases between EU Institutions Shape Competence Allocation," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(6), pages 1429-1445, September.
    4. Stone Sweet, Alex, 1999. "Judicialization and the Construction of Governance," Center for Culture, Organizations and Politics, Working Paper Series qt2fc6571w, Center for Culture, Organizations and Politics of theInstitute for Research on Labor and Employment, UC Berkeley.
    5. Carrubba, Clifford J. & Gabel, Matthew & Hankla, Charles, 2008. "Judicial Behavior under Political Constraints: Evidence from the European Court of Justice," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(4), pages 435-452, November.
    6. 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.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Michal Ovádek, 2021. "Supranationalism, constrained? Locating the Court of Justice on the EU integration dimension," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(1), pages 46-69, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Lauren Peritz, 2018. "Obstructing integration: Domestic politics and the European Court of Justice," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(3), pages 427-457, September.
    6. Sigrid Quack & Marie-Laure Salles-Djelic, 2005. "Adaptation, Recombination and Reinforcement," Post-Print hal-01892003, HAL.
    7. Heather A. D. Mbaye, 2001. "Why National States Comply with Supranational Law," European Union Politics, , vol. 2(3), pages 259-281, October.
    8. Susanne K. Schmidt, 2000. "Only an Agenda Setter?," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 37-61, February.
    9. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/26l5o52m2c857apcgdgcplhr3h is not listed on IDEAS
    10. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:48:y:2010:i::p:1307-1327 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. 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.
    12. Sigrid Quack & Marie-Laure Salles-Djelic, 2005. "Adaptation, Recombination and Reinforcement," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-01892003, HAL.
    13. Christian Adam & Michael W. Bauer & Miriam Hartlapp, 2015. "It's Not Always about Winning: Domestic Politics and Legal Success in EU Annulment Litigation," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 185-200, March.
    14. Clifford J. Carrubba, 2003. "The European Court of Justice, Democracy, and Enlargement," European Union Politics, , vol. 4(1), pages 75-100, March.
    15. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/26l5o52m2c857apcgdgcplhr3h is not listed on IDEAS
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Ninke Mussche & Dries Lens, 2018. "The EU Free Movement of Services and the growing mobility of Third-Country Nationals as posted workers," Working Papers 1813, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    20. William Phelan, 2008. "Why do EU Member States Offer a 'Constitutional' Obedience to EU Obligations? Encompassing Domestic Institutions and Costly International Obligations," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp256, IIIS.
    21. 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.
    22. Darren Hawkins & Wade Jacoby, 2008. "Agent permeability, principal delegation and the European Court of Human Rights," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-28, March.
    23. 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.

    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:cog:poango:v12:y:2024:a:7473. 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: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    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.