EU LAW

EU LAW

EU LAW

Introduction

The consistent interpretation of a law the same way as one or more other sentences is, notoriously, a rule of interpretation introduced by the Constitutional Court in order to invite the judges to seek and find common in the Constitution elements capable of directing the legal significance of the legislation.

This criterion has also received applications of external nature, such as the interpretation consistent with Community law and ECHR standards.

The hermeneutic of consistent technique embodies situations and issues.

This heterogeneity is derived, first, by the diversity of the parameters. It may, in fact, talk of consistent interpretation in three distinct parameters: the Constitution, the European Union law, international law.

The plural is also justified on other grounds, on the structural diversity of the types of common union that judges can exercise when you have to confront the national legislation with the different parameters presented above. In fact, in the case of EU law, the interpretation thereof is one of the tools that can use the court to enforce the prevalence of the parameter of the object. The other tool is the disapplication of national law that conflicts with European law, provided that it is directly applicable legislation. The direct effect is an expression of integration between systems: the case law Granital, it portrays the legal system and is applicable to the Community. If, however, lacks the direct effect, in the event of conflict between the norm and inner discipline is not a supranational logic of integration between systems that is relevant, but that in the control of validity within the national law. Occurs, i.e., the hypothesis of internal conflict between norm and norm EU lacks direct effect, a contrast that is resolved through the judgment incidental constitutionality before the Constitutional Court for violation of Articles. 11 and 117, 1 c. Constitution, in which the rule supranational fulfills the role normally interposed.

When the parameters are represented in relief by the Constitution and international law, the interpretation thereof is the only tool available to the court in order to ensure an immediate prevalence of the parameter object, unable to proceed with the disapplication of the rule against with the parameters mentioned. If the wording of the provision does not allow interpreted adeguatrice exegesis, the court cannot take responsibility for overcoming of the antinomy and must raise the question of constitutionality. In this context, the interpretation thereof becomes a vehicle through which "are common elements of trade union input into a system of constitutional review by a centralized".

Discussion

On this basis, the reflections that follow will be developed through the two directions of relationships between sources and sources of national and supranational role of consistent behavior from the ordinary courts.

2. Relations between EU rules and regulations of the Member States in view of the Court of Justice. - As known, the relationship between the Court and the Constitutional Court has developed primarily in terms of the relationship between legal systems. For a very long period, which embraced the period of thirty years and has not yet been completed, at each step in the European Court of Justice towards the affirmation of ...