IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eiq/eileqs/43.html

The Reference Points of EU Judicial Politics

Author

Listed:
  • Damian Chalmers
  • Mariana Chaves

Abstract

Explanations of the dynamics of EU judicial politics must also account for its incidence, namely when and in which sectors litigation of EU law and ECJ judgments occur. This incidence, it is suggested relies on a relationship between three arenas, those for norm-setting, litigation and judgments, as events in each of these arena conditions possibilities for action in the others. This paper analyses the relationship between these arenas through a study of all 2007-9 preliminary rulings and finds EU judicial politics characterised by two predominant dynamics. ‘Patrol norms’ dedicated to securing common policies give rise to low salient judgments dominated by transnational enterprise and national administration litigation. ‘Thickly evaluative norms’ are concerned with articulating certain values. Dominated by litigation by domestic undertakings and non-commercial actors, these norms generate the Court’s salient judgments.

Suggested Citation

  • Damian Chalmers & Mariana Chaves, 2011. "The Reference Points of EU Judicial Politics," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 43, European Institute, LSE.
    • Handle: RePEc:eiq:eileqs:43
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lse.ac.uk/europeanInstitute/LEQS/LEQSPaper43.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:47:y:2009:i::p:175-197 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Miceli, Thomas J. & Cosgel, Metin M., 1994. "Reputation and judicial decision-making," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 31-51, January.
    3. 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.
    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. Marilene Lorizio & Annamaria Stramaglia, 2016. "The Role of Judges in the Performance of Italian Courts," Business and Economic Research, Macrothink Institute, vol. 6(1), pages 492-504, June.
    2. Maximilian Margolin & Marko Reimer & Daniel Schaupp, 2025. "The Effects of Real-Time Feedback on Effort and Performance: Evidence from a Natural Quasi-Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(4), pages 3558-3582, April.
    3. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:48:y:2010:i::p:1307-1327 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Sivaram Cheruvu, 2025. "Are European Court of Justice judges biased towards their member states?," European Union Politics, , vol. 26(2), pages 281-295, June.
    5. Roland Vaubel, 2009. "Constitutional courts as promoters of political centralization: lessons for the European Court of Justice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 203-222, December.
    6. Przemysław Banasik & Katarzyna Metelska-Szaniawska & Małgorzata Godlewska & Sylwia Morawska, 2022. "Determinants of judges’ career choices and productivity: a Polish case study," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 81-107, February.
    7. Giuseppe Vita, 2012. "Normative complexity and the length of administrative disputes: evidence from Italian regions," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 197-213, August.
    8. Charles M. Cameron & Lewis A. Kornhauser, 2017. "Rational choice attitudinalism?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 535-554, June.
    9. 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.
    10. Frankenreiter Jens, 2018. "Are Advocates General Political? An Empirical Analysis of the Voting Behavior of the Advocates General at the European Court of Justice," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 1-43, March.
    11. Miceli, Thomas J., 2010. "Legal change and the social value of lawsuits," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 203-208, September.
    12. Whitman Douglas Glen, 2002. "Legal Entrepreneurship and Institutional Change," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 1-13, June.
    13. Ishan Joshi, 2022. "The evolution of consensus through coordinated action," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 34(4), pages 552-588, October.
    14. Benno Torgler, 2022. "The power of public choice in law and economics," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 1410-1453, December.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    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. Thomas König & Lars Mäder, 2013. "Non-conformable, partial and conformable transposition: A competing risk analysis of the transposition process of directives in the EU15," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(1), pages 46-69, March.
    19. Fabio Franchino & Camilla Mariotto, 2021. "Noncompliance risk, asymmetric power and the design of enforcement of the European economic governance," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 591-610, December.
    20. Stuart Minor Benjamin & Georg Vanberg, 2016. "Judicial Retirements and the Staying Power of U.S. Supreme Court Decisions," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 5-26, March.
    21. Vaubel, Roland, 2009. "Nie sollst Du mich befragen? Weshalb Referenden in bestimmten Politikbereichen - auch in der Europapolitik - möglich sein sollten," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 82, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eiq:eileqs:43. 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: Katjana Gattermann (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eilseuk.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.