Analogies in the case law of the Court of Justice EU

Abstract

The article reports on some judgements of the Court of Justice EU concerning analogy, commenting them. Passages from the cases OMEL v ONEL, PAGO, GOOGLE, .eu Top Domain, DIOR are quoted. Then the question is raised: should it be considered as an analogy or a precedent? Definition of the notion “analogy” in French, English and German law are compared. The first conclusion is that analogy is understood in different ways by lawyers in these Member States of the EU. The second conclusion is that by a Hungarian lawyer’s understanding most of the examples quoted are rather precedents than true analogies. Moreover, it is observed that in translations identical terms ought to be used.