IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jcmkts/v48y2010i4p1039-1063.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Nordics, the EU and the Reluctance Towards Supranational Judicial Review

Author

Listed:
  • MARLENE WIND

Abstract

The Nordic countries have no tradition of judicial review by courts and have generally been hesitant to make use of the preliminary ruling procedure in the European Union. New data indicate that Nordic courts prefer to solve as many EU‐related judicial disputes as possible without involving a supranational organ such as the ECJ. Building on two comprehensive surveys of Danish and Swedish courts and judges, this study challenges the theory of judicial empowerment when explaining judicial integration in the EU. The article argues that in order to explain when and why Member State courts make use of the preliminary ruling procedure, a much deeper understanding of the prevalent legal/political culture and concept of democracy in each Member State is required. In particular, the distinction between majoritarian versus constitutional democracies may help us understand why majoritarian democracies express greater scepticism towards supranational judicial review.

Suggested Citation

  • Marlene Wind, 2010. "The Nordics, the EU and the Reluctance Towards Supranational Judicial Review," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 1039-1063, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:48:y:2010:i:4:p:1039-1063
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02085.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02085.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02085.x?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. Dorte Sindbjerg Martinsen, 2005. "The Europeanization of Welfare ‐ The Domestic Impact of Intra‐European Social Security," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(5), pages 1027-1054, December.
    2. Alter, Karen J., 2000. "The European Union's Legal System and Domestic Policy: Spillover or Backlash?," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 54(3), pages 489-518, July.
    3. Mattli, Walter & Slaughter, Anne-Marie, 1998. "Revisiting the European Court of Justice," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(1), pages 177-209, January.
    4. Marlene Wind & Dorte Sindbjerg Martinsen & Gabriel Pons Rotger, 2009. "The Uneven Legal Push for Europe," European Union Politics, , vol. 10(1), pages 63-88, March.
    5. Stone Sweet, Alec, 2004. "The Judicial Construction of Europe," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199275533.
    6. 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)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bjarke Refslund & Karen Jaehrling & Mathew Johnson & Aristea Koukiadaki & Trine Pernille Larsen & Christin Stiehm, 2020. "Moving In and Out of the Shadow of European Case Law: the Dynamics of Public Procurement in the Post‐Post‐Rüffert Era," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(5), pages 1165-1181, September.
    2. Åsa Casula Vifell & Ebba Sjögren, 2014. "The Legal Mind of the Internal Market: A Governmentality Perspective on the Judicialization of Monitoring Practices," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 461-478, May.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Marlene Wind, 2010. "The Nordics, the EU and the Reluctance Towards Supranational Judicial Review," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48, pages 1039-1063, September.
    4. Stefan Voigt, "undated". "Iudex Calculat: The ECJ's Quest for Power," German Working Papers in Law and Economics 2003-1-1066, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    5. Marlene Wind & Dorte Sindbjerg Martinsen & Gabriel Pons Rotger, 2009. "The Uneven Legal Push for Europe," European Union Politics, , vol. 10(1), pages 63-88, March.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Dyevre, Arthur & Lampach, Nicolas, 2018. "The origins of regional integration: Untangling the effect of trade on judicial cooperation," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 122-133.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. George Tridimas, 2004. "A Political Economy Perspective of Judicial Review in the European Union: Judicial Appointments Rule, Accessibility and Jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 99-116, July.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Höpner, Martin, 2010. "Warum betreibt der Europäische Gerichtshof Rechtsfortbildung? Die Politisierungshypothese," MPIfG Working Paper 10/2, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.

    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:48:y:2010:i:4:p:1039-1063. 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.