지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The primary responsibility of national courts for the correct application of Community law is rounded off by the preliminary ruling procedure, which, in the words of the European Court of Justice, is essential for preservation of the Community character of the law established by the Treaty and has the object of ensuring that in all circumstances this law is the same in all States of the Community. Only national courts or tribunals against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law may make such references for preliminary rulings. They are under a duty to make such a reference if they consider that a decision on the question is necessary to enable them to give judgment. That co-operation requires the national court and the European Court of Justice, both keeping within their respective jurisdiction, and with the aim of ensuring that Community law is applied in a uniform manner, to make direct and complementary contributions to the working out of a decision.
A request for a preliminary ruling takes the form of a question put to the European Court of Justice, which is subject to a number of rules. First, the initiative of referring the question must emanate from “a court or tribunal of a Member States”, either or its own motion or acting on a request made by one of the parties in proceedings pending before it, and national procedural law may not put impediments in the way of the right to seek a preliminary ruling which every national court or tribunal has by virtue of Community law. Consequently, the relevance of the question falls to be determined by the national court, albeit only within certain limits which the European Court of Justice has placed upon its competence to answer questions referred for a preliminary ruling. Lastly, a court of tribunal of a Member State against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law is in principle obliged to refer questions for a preliminary ruling which are raised in a case pending before it. The “preliminary reference procedure” of the Article 234(ex Article 177) of Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community has been the important role to form and development of the regional integration of the European Union.
The preliminary reference procedure of the European Court of Justice has developed the regional integration of the European Union by the uniform judicial order of the European Union and the Member States.
A request for a preliminary ruling takes the form of a question put to the European Court of Justice, which is subject to a number of rules. First, the initiative of referring the question must emanate from “a court or tribunal of a Member States”, either or its own motion or acting on a request made by one of the parties in proceedings pending before it, and national procedural law may not put impediments in the way of the right to seek a preliminary ruling which every national court or tribunal has by virtue of Community law. Consequently, the relevance of the question falls to be determined by the national court, albeit only within certain limits which the European Court of Justice has placed upon its competence to answer questions referred for a preliminary ruling. Lastly, a court of tribunal of a Member State against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law is in principle obliged to refer questions for a preliminary ruling which are raised in a case pending before it. The “preliminary reference procedure” of the Article 234(ex Article 177) of Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community has been the important role to form and development of the regional integration of the European Union.
The preliminary reference procedure of the European Court of Justice has developed the regional integration of the European Union by the uniform judicial order of the European Union and the Member States.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 선결적 부탁의 제기에 관한 일반적 고찰
Ⅲ. 선결적 부탁의 관련성 인정의 문제
Ⅳ. 선결적 부탁의 의무상의 문제
Ⅴ. 결론
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
EU法上 先決的 付託節次의 限界와 克服方案
국제법학회논총
2005 .04
-
EU法上 先決的 付託節次의 實體法的 機能
외법논집
2005 .01
-
Case Study in Judicial Activism of the European Court
유럽연구
1999 .12
-
행정법상 선결문제와 헌법 제107조 제2항에서의 '처분' 및 '재판의 전제'와의 관계
행정법연구
2009 .12
-
형사절차에 있어서 치료적 사법의 도입에 관한 연구
한양법학
2014 .05
-
유럽재판소의 사법적극주의에 관한 연구
유럽연구
1998 .06
-
유럽인권협약 제16의정서에 담긴 유럽인권재판소의 권고적 관할권 : EU사법재판소의 선결적 부탁절차와의 비교를 중심으로
국제법학회논총
2016 .03
-
유럽인권재판소의 구제절차와 판결의 국내법적 효력-독일의 사례를 중심으로-
원광법학
2014 .01
-
ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF The Korean Law of the Constitution of the Courts of Justice etc.(2)
법사학연구
2001 .04
-
ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF The Korean Law of the Constitution of the Courts of Justice etc.(1)
법사학연구
2000 .10
-
유럽연합의 민주주의 결여 극복 노력의 함의
원광법학
2011 .01
-
中國法院의 管轄 : 행정소송법을 중심으로
행정법연구
2006 .10
-
EU통합상 회원국의 주권문제
외법논집
2007 .01
-
美國憲法上 司法權 關聯 規定의 構造와 內容
미국헌법연구
2005 .09
-
유럽헌법상 입법행위의 단순화에 대한 법적 검토 : 유럽헌법 제1-33조를 중심으로
유럽연구
2005 .12
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-360-001483034