多样性中的统一是欧洲的使命,冲突法是欧洲的宪法形式

C. Joerges
{"title":"多样性中的统一是欧洲的使命,冲突法是欧洲的宪法形式","authors":"C. Joerges","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1723249","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"“Unity in Diversity” was the fortunate motto of the otherwise unfortunate Draft Constitutional Treaty. The motto did not make it into the Treaty of Lisbon. It deserves to be kept alive in a new constitutional perspective, namely the re-conceptualisation of European law as new type of conflicts law. The new type of conflicts law which the paper advocates is not concerned with selecting the proper legal system in cases with connections to various jurisdictions. It is instead meant to respond to the increasing interdependence of formerly more autonomous legal orders and to the democracy failure of constitutional states which result from the external effects of their laws and legal decisions on non-nationals. European has many means to compensate these shortcomings. It can derive its legitimacy from that compensatory potential without developing federal aspirations. The paper illustrates this approach with the help of a topical example, namely the conflict between European economic freedoms and national industrial relations (collective labour) law. The recent jurisprudence of the ECJ in Viking, Laval, and Ruffert in which the Court established the supremacy of the freedoms over national labour law is criticised as a counter-productive deepening of Europe's constitutional asymmetry and its social deficit. The introductory and the concluding sections generalise the perspectives of the conflicts-law approach. The introductory section takes issue with max Weber’s national state. The concluding section suggests a three dimensional differentiation of the approach which seeks to respond to the need for transnational egulation and governance.","PeriodicalId":359449,"journal":{"name":"LSE Research Online Documents on Economics","volume":"95 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"34","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unity in diversity as Europe's vocation and conflict's law as Europe's constitutional form\",\"authors\":\"C. Joerges\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.1723249\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"“Unity in Diversity” was the fortunate motto of the otherwise unfortunate Draft Constitutional Treaty. The motto did not make it into the Treaty of Lisbon. It deserves to be kept alive in a new constitutional perspective, namely the re-conceptualisation of European law as new type of conflicts law. The new type of conflicts law which the paper advocates is not concerned with selecting the proper legal system in cases with connections to various jurisdictions. It is instead meant to respond to the increasing interdependence of formerly more autonomous legal orders and to the democracy failure of constitutional states which result from the external effects of their laws and legal decisions on non-nationals. European has many means to compensate these shortcomings. It can derive its legitimacy from that compensatory potential without developing federal aspirations. The paper illustrates this approach with the help of a topical example, namely the conflict between European economic freedoms and national industrial relations (collective labour) law. The recent jurisprudence of the ECJ in Viking, Laval, and Ruffert in which the Court established the supremacy of the freedoms over national labour law is criticised as a counter-productive deepening of Europe's constitutional asymmetry and its social deficit. The introductory and the concluding sections generalise the perspectives of the conflicts-law approach. The introductory section takes issue with max Weber’s national state. The concluding section suggests a three dimensional differentiation of the approach which seeks to respond to the need for transnational egulation and governance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":359449,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSE Research Online Documents on Economics\",\"volume\":\"95 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"34\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSE Research Online Documents on Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1723249\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSE Research Online Documents on Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1723249","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 34

摘要

“多样化中的统一”是不幸的《宪法条约草案》的幸运格言。这句格言并没有被写入里斯本条约。它值得在新的宪法视角下保持活力,即将欧洲法重新概念化为新型的冲突法。本文所倡导的新型冲突法并不关注在涉及多个司法管辖区的案件中选择合适的法律制度。相反,它的目的是对以前更加自治的法律秩序日益相互依存的情况作出反应,并对宪法国家的民主失败作出反应,这种失败是由于其法律和法律决定对非国民的外部影响造成的。欧洲有很多办法弥补这些缺点。它可以在不发展联邦愿望的情况下,从这种补偿潜力中获得合法性。本文通过一个热门的例子,即欧洲经济自由与国家劳资关系(集体劳动)法之间的冲突,说明了这种方法。欧洲法院最近在维京、拉瓦尔和鲁菲特案中确立了自由高于国家劳动法的判例,这一判例被批评为对欧洲宪法不对称和社会赤字的加深产生了适得其反的效果。引言和结语部分概括了冲突法方法的观点。引言部分对马克斯·韦伯的民族国家提出质疑。最后一节提出了力求对跨国管制和治理的需要作出反应的办法的三个方面的区别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Unity in diversity as Europe's vocation and conflict's law as Europe's constitutional form
“Unity in Diversity” was the fortunate motto of the otherwise unfortunate Draft Constitutional Treaty. The motto did not make it into the Treaty of Lisbon. It deserves to be kept alive in a new constitutional perspective, namely the re-conceptualisation of European law as new type of conflicts law. The new type of conflicts law which the paper advocates is not concerned with selecting the proper legal system in cases with connections to various jurisdictions. It is instead meant to respond to the increasing interdependence of formerly more autonomous legal orders and to the democracy failure of constitutional states which result from the external effects of their laws and legal decisions on non-nationals. European has many means to compensate these shortcomings. It can derive its legitimacy from that compensatory potential without developing federal aspirations. The paper illustrates this approach with the help of a topical example, namely the conflict between European economic freedoms and national industrial relations (collective labour) law. The recent jurisprudence of the ECJ in Viking, Laval, and Ruffert in which the Court established the supremacy of the freedoms over national labour law is criticised as a counter-productive deepening of Europe's constitutional asymmetry and its social deficit. The introductory and the concluding sections generalise the perspectives of the conflicts-law approach. The introductory section takes issue with max Weber’s national state. The concluding section suggests a three dimensional differentiation of the approach which seeks to respond to the need for transnational egulation and governance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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