IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/sfb597/184.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Vom EuGH-Urteil zur Richtlinie: Wie die EU-Mitgliedstaaten über die Kodifizierung europäischer Rechtsprechung entscheiden

Author

Listed:
  • Schreinermacher, Björn

Abstract

Das Arbeitspapier nimmt die Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs mit seiner starken Integrationswirkung (Weiler 1981; Scharpf 1999; Kelemen & Schmidt 2012) als Ausgangspunkt und stellt die Frage, in welcher Weise dieses Richterrecht in nachfolgender EU-Gesetzgebung aufgegriffen wird. In zwei Fallstudien zum Umgang der Dienstleistungsrichtlinie mit der Kostenerstattung für Gesundheitsleistungen und zur Verankerung von Sozialhilfeansprüchen erwerbsloser Unionsbürger in der Unionsbürgerrichtlinie zeigt sich, dass die Befolgung vorangegangener EuGH-Rechtsprechung durch nationale Verwaltungen und Gerichte die Bereitschaft der Mitgliedstaaten zur Kodifizierung in einem europäischen Gesetz beeinflusst (vgl. auch Conant 2002; Alter 2009). In beiden Fällen kam es jedoch zu Entscheidungen von Regierungen und Kommission, die der Compliance mit der Rechtsprechung und den daraus zu erwartenden Positionen nicht entsprachen. Die dafür verantwortlichen Handlungszwänge liegen einerseits in der unterschiedlichen Öffentlichkeitswirkung von Richterrecht und Gesetzgebung begründet, andererseits in Wechselwirkungen zwischen einzelnen Policyaspekten und der Notwendigkeit zur Prioritätensetzung. Abschließend wird festgestellt, dass es nicht nur zu diesen Aspekten weiterer Forschung bedarf, sondern auch zur Compliance mit europäischem Richterrecht und zu ihrer Auswirkung auf europäische Verhandlungspositionen (vgl. Blauberger 2012; Schreinermacher 2014: 240-244).

Suggested Citation

  • Schreinermacher, Björn, 2014. "Vom EuGH-Urteil zur Richtlinie: Wie die EU-Mitgliedstaaten über die Kodifizierung europäischer Rechtsprechung entscheiden," TranState Working Papers 184, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:sfb597:184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/103747/1/799226211.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schmidt, Susanne K., 1998. "Liberalisierung in Europa: Die Rolle der Europäischen Kommission," Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, volume 33, number 33.
    2. Gerda Falkner & Oliver Treib, 2008. "Three Worlds of Compliance or Four? The EU‐15 Compared to New Member States," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 293-313, March.
    3. 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).
    4. Stone Sweet, Alec, 2004. "The Judicial Construction of Europe," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199275533.
    5. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:46:y:2008:i::p:293-313 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Scharpf, Fritz W., 1999. "Regieren in Europa: Effektiv und demokratisch?," Schriften aus dem Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, volume 0, number sbd-1999.
    7. 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.
    8. 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. 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.
    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. Susanne K. Schmidt, 2000. "Only an Agenda Setter?," European Union Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 37-61, February.
    4. 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.
    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. Passalacqua Virginia, 2022. "Who Mobilizes the Court? Migrant Rights Defenders Before the Court of Justice of the EU," The Law and Development Review, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 381-405, June.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Seikel, Daniel, 2011. "Wie die Europäische Kommission Liberalisierung durchsetzt: Der Konflikt um das öffentlich-rechtliche Bankenwesen in Deutschland," MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/16, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    12. Philipp Genschel & Markus Jachtenfuchs, 2017. "From market integration to core state powers: the Eurozone crisis, the refugee crisis and integration theory," RSCAS Working Papers 2017/26, European University Institute.
    13. Philippa Dee & Anne McNaughton, 2013. "Promoting Domestic Reforms through Regionalism," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Services Trade Reform Making Sense of It, chapter 14, pages 381-427, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Höpner, Martin, 2008. "Usurpation statt Delegation: Wie der EuGH die Binnenmarktintegration radikalisiert und warum er politischer Kontrolle bedarf," MPIfG Discussion Paper 08/12, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    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. Denise Carolin Hübner, 2016. "The ‘National Decisions’ database (Dec.Nat): Introducing a database on national courts’ interactions with European Law," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(2), pages 324-339, June.
    19. Höpner, Martin & Schäfer, Armin, 2007. "A New Phase of European Integration: Organized Capitalisms in Post-Ricardian Europe," MPIfG Discussion Paper 07/4, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:sfb597:184. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zesbrde.html .

    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.