Der EuGH als Feind? Die Debatte um das soziale Europa in der europäischen Rechtsprechung

Since the rulings 'Viking', 'Laval', 'Rüffert' and 'Commission against Luxembourg', the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has been faced by a formerly unknown range of criticism – way beyond the usual debate on European law and way beyond the concerned member st...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Integration (Bonn, Germany) Germany), 2009-07, Vol.32 (3), p.246-265
Main Author: Mayer, Franz C.
Format: Article
Language:ger ; eng
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Since the rulings 'Viking', 'Laval', 'Rüffert' and 'Commission against Luxembourg', the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has been faced by a formerly unknown range of criticism – way beyond the usual debate on European law and way beyond the concerned member states. One central accusation is that the ECJ does not contribute to removing the 'social deficit' of the integration project. Besides the criticism of the decisions, objections are voiced against the Treaty of Lisbon, which is accused of market radicalism. More rational analyses of the legal basis and the case-law show, however, that such objections are not really justified. What would be needed for a more social Europe are further developments of the legal basis which, of course, would require corresponding majorities. Excessive attacks on the ECJ, on the other hand, bear considerable risks for the concept of a community of law (Rechtsgemeinschaft), insofar as the ECJ could suffer lasting damages.
ISSN:0720-5120
DOI:10.5771/0720-5120-2009-3-246