Advertisement

Quantitatively Structuring Precedents

  • Marie De Somer
Chapter
Part of the European Administrative Governance book series (EAGOV)

Abstract

This chapter presents the study’s second empirical step which consists of quantitatively structuring CJEU self-citation practices, that is, observations of Court citations to its own prior rulings. More precisely, on the basis of a numerically grounded comparison, this chapter provides an overview of the self-citation structures that appear most prominent for the case law’s development as a whole. The need for such a quantitative exercise is connected to the study’s explicitly longitudinal outlook which calls for a dataset of Court rulings that spans a sufficiently long time period and is, by consequence, voluminous. The quantitative structuring serves to facilitate and systematize the further analytical engagement with the sizeable dataset. In addition, by structuring the data on the basis of numerical criteria, the exercise also shields these further analyses from selective sampling on the dependent variable.

Keywords

Self-citation patterns Inward scores Outward scores 

References

Primary Sources

    CJEU Case Law

    1. Case C-40/76 Slavica Kermaschek v Bundesanstalt für Arbeit [1976] ECR 1669.Google Scholar
    2. Case C-35/82 Elestina Esselina Christina Morson v State of the Netherlands and Head of the Plaatselijke Politie within the meaning of the Vreemdelingenwet; Sweradjie Jhanjan v State of the Netherlands [1982] ECR 3723.Google Scholar
    3. Case C-238/83 Caisse d’Allocations Familiales de la Région Parisienne v Mr and Mrs Richard Meade [1984] ECR 2631.Google Scholar
    4. Case C-267/83 Aissatou Diatta v Land Berlin [1985] ECR 567.Google Scholar
    5. Case C-94/84 Office national de l’emploi v Joszef Deak [1985] ECR 1873.Google Scholar
    6. Case C-131/85 Emir Gül v Regierungspräsident Düsseldorf [1986] ECR 1573.Google Scholar
    7. Case C-147/87 Saada Zaoui v Caisse régionale d’assurance maladie de l’Ile-de-France (CRAMIF) [1987] ECR 5511.Google Scholar
    8. Cases C-297/88 & C-197/89 Massam Dzodzi v Belgian State [1990] ECR I-3763.Google Scholar
    9. Case C-370/90 The Queen v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Surinder Singh, ex parte Secretary of State for Home Department [1992] ECR I-4265.Google Scholar
    10. Case C-206/91 Ettien Koua Poirrez v Caisse d’allocations familiales de la région parisienne, substituée par la Caisse d’allocations familiales de la Seine-Saint-Denis [1992] ECR I-6685.Google Scholar
    11. Case C-243/91 Belgian State v Noushin Taghavi [1992] ECR I-4401.Google Scholar
    12. Case C-64/96 Land Nordrhein-Westfalen v Kari Uecker and Vera Jacquet v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen [1992] ECR I-3171.Google Scholar
    13. Case C-356/98 Arben Kaba v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2000] ECR I-2623.Google Scholar
    14. Case C-413/99 Baumbast and R v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] ECR I-7091.Google Scholar
    15. Case C-60/00 Mary Carpenter v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] ECR I-6279.Google Scholar
    16. Case C-459/99 Mouvement contre le racisme, l’antisémitisme et la xénophobie ASBL (MRAX) v Belgian State [2002] ECR I-6591.Google Scholar
    17. Case C-189/00 Urszula Ruhr v Bundesanstalt für Arbeit [2001] ECR I-8225.Google Scholar
    18. Case C-257/00 Nani Givane and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] ECR I-345.Google Scholar
    19. Case C-466/00 Arben Kaba v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] ECR I-2219.Google Scholar
    20. Case C-109/01 Secretary of State for the Home Department v Hacene Akrich [2003] ECR I-9607.Google Scholar
    21. Case C-200/02 Kunqian Catherine Zhu and Man Lavette Chen v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] ECR I-9925.Google Scholar
    22. Case C-157/03 Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain [2005] ECR I-2911.Google Scholar
    23. Case C-503/03 Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain [2006] ECR I-1097.Google Scholar
    24. Case C-540/03 European Parliament v Council of the European Union [2006] ECR I-5769.Google Scholar
    25. Case C-1/05 Yunying Jia v Migrationsverket [2006] ECR I-00001.Google Scholar
    26. Case C-10/05 Cynthia Mattern and Hajrudin Cikotic v Ministre du Travail et de l’Emploi [2006] ECR I-3145.Google Scholar
    27. Case C-165/05 Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxemburg [2005] not yet reported.Google Scholar
    28. Case C-291/05 Minister voor Vreemdelingenzaken en Integratie v R. N. G. Eind [2007] ECR I-10719.Google Scholar
    29. Case C-57/07 Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxemburg [2007] ECR I-183.Google Scholar
    30. Case C-87/07 Commission v Malta [2007] OJ C 82.Google Scholar
    31. Case C-91/07 Commission v Italy [2007] OJ C 82.Google Scholar
    32. Case C-192/07 Commission v Germany [2007] OJ C 117.Google Scholar
    33. Case C-551/07 Deniz Sahin v Bundesminister für Inneres [2008] ECR I-10453.Google Scholar
    34. Case C-127/08 Blaise Baheten Metock and Others v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform [2008] ECR I-6241.Google Scholar
    35. Case C-310/08 London Borough of Harrow v Nimco Hassan Ibrahim and Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] ECR I-1065.Google Scholar
    36. Case C-578/08 Rhimou Chakroun v Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken [2010] ECR I-1893.Google Scholar
    37. Case C-34/09 Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano v Office national de l’emploi (ONEM) [2011] ECR I-1177.Google Scholar
    38. Case C-247/09 Alketa Xhymshiti v Bundesagentur für Arbeit—Familienkasse Lörrach [2010] ECR I-11845.Google Scholar
    39. Case C-434/09 Shirley McCarthy v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] ECR I-3375.Google Scholar
    40. Case C-508/10 European Commission v Kingdom of the Netherlands [2012] OJ C174/7.Google Scholar
    41. Case C-256/11 Murat Dereci and Others v Bundesministerium für Inneres [2011] ECR I-11315.Google Scholar
    42. Case C-40/11 Yoshikazu Iida v Stadt Ulm [2013] OJ C 9/10.Google Scholar
    43. Case C-83/11 Secretary of State for the Home Department v Muhammad Sazzadur Rahman and Others [2013] OJ C 331/6.Google Scholar
    44. Case C-155/11 Bibi Mohammad Imran v Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken [2011] ECR I-0595.Google Scholar
    45. Case C-356/11 & C-357/11 O and S v Maahanmuuttovirasto and Maahanmuuttovirasto v L [2013] OJ C 26/19.Google Scholar
    46. Case C-529/11 Olaitan Ajoke Alarape and Olukayode Azeez Tijani v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] OJ C 225/20.Google Scholar
    47. Case C-45/12 Office national d’allocations familiales pour travailleurs salariés (ONAFTS) v Radia Hadj Ahmed [2013] OJ C 225/40.Google Scholar
    48. Case C-86/12 Adzo Domenyo Alokpa and Others v Ministre du Travail, de l’Emploi et de l’Immigration [2013] OJ C 344/21.Google Scholar
    49. Case C-87/12 Kreshnik Ymeraga and Others v Ministre du Travail, de l’Emploi et de l’Immigration [2013] OJ C 225/44.Google Scholar
    50. Case C-423/12 Flora May Reyes v Migrationsverket [2014].Google Scholar
    51. Case C-456/12 O. v Minister voor Immigratie, Integratie en Asiel and Minister voor Immigratie, Integratie en Asiel v B. Reference for a preliminary ruling: Raad van State—Netherlands [2014] OJ C135/5.Google Scholar

Literature

  1. Creswell, J., & Clark, V. (2010). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Derlén, M., & Lindholm, J. (2014). Goodbye van Gend en Loos, Hello Bosman? Using Network Analysis to Measure the Importance of Individual CJEU Judgments. European Law Journal, 20(5), 667–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. De Somer, M., & Vink, M. (2015). ‘Precedent’ and Fundamental Rights in the CJEU’s Case Law on Family Reunification Immigration. European Integration Online Papers, 19, 1–33.Google Scholar
  4. Fowler, J., & Jeon, S. (2008). The Authority of Supreme Court Precedent. Social Networks, 30, 16–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Jacob, M. (2014). Precedents and Case-based Reasoning in the European Court of Justice: Unfinished Business. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Lupu, Y., & Voeten, E. (2012). Precedent in International Courts: A Network Analysis of Case Citations by the European Court of Human Rights. British Journal of Political Science, 42(2), 413–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Pelc, K. (2014). The Politics of Precedent in International Law: A Social Network Application. American Political Science Review, 108(3), 547–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Stone Sweet, A. (2004). The Judicial Construction of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marie De Somer
    • 1
  1. 1.University of LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations