Kadi: King‐Slayer or King‐Maker? The Shifting Allocation of Decision‐Making Power between the UN Security Council and Courts

D. Hovell
{"title":"Kadi: King‐Slayer or King‐Maker? The Shifting Allocation of Decision‐Making Power between the UN Security Council and Courts","authors":"D. Hovell","doi":"10.1111/1468-2230.12170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This note analyses the twelve‐year span of the Kadi litigation in the European courts. The litigation raises the textbook question of the relationship between international and municipal legal orders, yet demonstrates that it is high time to move the description of this relationship beyond the orthodox yet outdated monist/dualist dichotomy that was seen to provide the answer in less complicated times. The note examines the different approaches taken at the three key phases of the litigation: the ‘supremacy’ position adopted by the Court of First Instance in 2005, the ‘subversive’ approach of the European Court of Justice in 2008 and the ‘subsidiarity’ position of the Court of Justice of the European Union in 2013. Ultimately, the note invites attention to the ‘Solange equivalence’ approach taken by the Advocates‐General and argues that this strikes the best balance in normative terms for an enduring approach to power‐sharing between legal orders.","PeriodicalId":113747,"journal":{"name":"Litigation & Procedure eJournal","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Litigation & Procedure eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12170","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

This note analyses the twelve‐year span of the Kadi litigation in the European courts. The litigation raises the textbook question of the relationship between international and municipal legal orders, yet demonstrates that it is high time to move the description of this relationship beyond the orthodox yet outdated monist/dualist dichotomy that was seen to provide the answer in less complicated times. The note examines the different approaches taken at the three key phases of the litigation: the ‘supremacy’ position adopted by the Court of First Instance in 2005, the ‘subversive’ approach of the European Court of Justice in 2008 and the ‘subsidiarity’ position of the Court of Justice of the European Union in 2013. Ultimately, the note invites attention to the ‘Solange equivalence’ approach taken by the Advocates‐General and argues that this strikes the best balance in normative terms for an enduring approach to power‐sharing between legal orders.
卡迪:弑君者还是造王者?联合国安理会与法院之间决策权分配的转移
本文分析了欧洲法院卡迪诉讼的12年跨度。该诉讼提出了国际和地方法律秩序之间关系的教科书问题,但表明现在是时候将这种关系的描述超越正统但过时的一元论/二元论二分法,这种二分法被视为在不那么复杂的时代提供答案。该说明考察了在诉讼的三个关键阶段采取的不同方法:2005年初审法院采取的“至上”立场,2008年欧洲法院采取的“颠覆”立场,以及2013年欧盟法院采取的“辅助”立场。最后,该说明提请人们注意“索朗热等效”方法,并认为这种方法在规范方面达到了最佳平衡,从而实现了法律秩序之间权力分享的持久方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信