IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/eurstu/v7y2020i1p125-153n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The European Perspective on the Notion of Precedent – are EU and Czech Court Decisions Source of Law?

Author

Listed:
  • Sehnálek David

    (1 Ph.D., Faculty of Law, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The article focuses on the substance and effects of judicial decisions. Judgements of domestic courts and those of the Court of Justice of the EU are examined separately in terms of their nature. Specifically, the article deals with the question of their binding effect and also whether they can be considered a source of Czech and EU law. The author discusses and questions the opinion, which is currently prevailing among Czech authors, that decisions of supreme courts should be considered binding and simultaneously a source of law comparable to precedents, as they are known in Anglo-American law. The article further points out that the alleged similarity between judgements rendered by the Czech courts and the Court of Justice of the EU is merely ostensible, as each of them has a different nature and effects in the Czech legal environment. The conclusion is, in simple terms, that judgements of domestic courts generally cannot be considered a source of law, that they do not contain any new legal norms and, finally, that they comprise merely a simple and changeable interpretation of legal norms created by the law-making body.

Suggested Citation

  • Sehnálek David, 2020. "The European Perspective on the Notion of Precedent – are EU and Czech Court Decisions Source of Law?," European Studies - The Review of European Law, Economics and Politics, Sciendo, vol. 7(1), pages 125-153, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:vrs:eurstu:v:7:y:2020:i:1:p:125-153:n:3
    DOI: 10.2478/eustu-2022-0050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/eustu-2022-0050
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/eustu-2022-0050?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
    ---><---

    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:vrs:eurstu:v:7:y:2020:i:1:p:125-153:n:3. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.