The Doctrine of Consistent Interpretation: Managing Legal Uncertainty
The Doctrine of Consistent Interpretation: Managing Legal Uncertainty
This article reviews ECJ case law on the conceptualization and legal circumscription of the doctrine of consistent interpretation, reflecting its fundamental importance as a mode of giving effect to Community law before national authorities. Legal uncertainty, an inherent characteristic of the technique, should be reduced, it is argued, by improving the reasoning of the ECJ's judgments. In particular, a highly critical discussion of the Arcaro judgment concludes that its precedent value is very limited. A parallelism in approach to both consistent interpretation and direct effect is suggested. Partly, this has already been achieved insofar as the issue of expiry of the transposition period of directives is concerned. In addition, the article suggests a reform of the case law on consistent interpretation in actions by the State versus individuals and offers explanations for the seemingly inconsistent nature of the cases producing a horizontal impact of directives despite the lack of horizontal direct effect properly so-called (incidental effects). In considering whether the doctrine gives rise to unacceptable legal uncertainty, a comparison with the interpretive obligation under the UK Human Rights Act 1998 is made, which produces similar results.
397-418
Betlem, Gerrit
aedeeac7-b8af-4209-9caa-bee60854246d
2002
Betlem, Gerrit
aedeeac7-b8af-4209-9caa-bee60854246d
Betlem, Gerrit
(2002)
The Doctrine of Consistent Interpretation: Managing Legal Uncertainty.
Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 22 (3), .
(doi:10.1093/ojls/22.3.397).
Abstract
This article reviews ECJ case law on the conceptualization and legal circumscription of the doctrine of consistent interpretation, reflecting its fundamental importance as a mode of giving effect to Community law before national authorities. Legal uncertainty, an inherent characteristic of the technique, should be reduced, it is argued, by improving the reasoning of the ECJ's judgments. In particular, a highly critical discussion of the Arcaro judgment concludes that its precedent value is very limited. A parallelism in approach to both consistent interpretation and direct effect is suggested. Partly, this has already been achieved insofar as the issue of expiry of the transposition period of directives is concerned. In addition, the article suggests a reform of the case law on consistent interpretation in actions by the State versus individuals and offers explanations for the seemingly inconsistent nature of the cases producing a horizontal impact of directives despite the lack of horizontal direct effect properly so-called (incidental effects). In considering whether the doctrine gives rise to unacceptable legal uncertainty, a comparison with the interpretive obligation under the UK Human Rights Act 1998 is made, which produces similar results.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: 2002
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 27877
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/27877
ISSN: 0143-6503
PURE UUID: fab61efd-f61e-4f6d-9588-98beb5d51b5c
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 23 May 2006
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 07:21
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Gerrit Betlem
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics