Advertisement

Precedents and Judicial Politics: Analytical Findings

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

Abstract

This chapter brings together the findings on Member States’ political preferences as collected at the beginning of the analysis (Chap.  5) with those on the long-term implications deriving from the Court’s precedent-based reasoning as examined in the further analyses (Chaps.  6 and  7). On that basis, this chapter presents the study’s overall analytical findings on whether and how precedent-based patterns strengthen the Court’s autonomy.

Keywords

Judicial autonomy Member State preferences Precedent-based reasoning 

References

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. Case C-413/99 Baumbast and R v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] ECR I-7091.Google Scholar
  4. Case C-60/00 Mary Carpenter v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] ECR I-6279.Google Scholar
  5. Case C-459/99 Mouvement contre le racisme, l’antisémitisme et la xénophobie ASBL (MRAX) v Belgian State [2002] ECR I-6591.Google Scholar
  6. Case C-109/01 Secretary of State for the Home Department v Hacene Akrich [2003] ECR I-9607.Google Scholar
  7. 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
  8. Case C-157/03 Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain [2005] ECR I-2911.Google Scholar
  9. Case C-503/03 Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain [2006] ECR I-1097.Google Scholar
  10. Case C-540/03 European Parliament v Council of the European Union [2006] ECR I-5769.Google Scholar
  11. Case C-1/05 Yunying Jia v Migrationsverket [2006] ECR I-00001.Google Scholar
  12. Case C-291/05 Minister voor Vreemdelingenzaken en Integratie v R. N. G. Eind [2007] ECR I-10719.Google Scholar
  13. Case C-127/08 Blaise Baheten Metock and Others v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform [2008] ECR I-6241.Google Scholar
  14. Case C-578/08 Rhimou Chakroun v Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken [2010] ECR I-1893.Google Scholar
  15. Case C-34/09 Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano v Office national de l’emploi (ONEM) [2011] ECR I-1177.Google Scholar
  16. Case C-434/09 Shirley McCarthy v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] ECR I-3375.Google Scholar
  17. Case C-256/11 Murat Dereci and Others v Bundesministerium für Inneres [2011] ECR I-11315.Google Scholar
  18. Case C-40/11 Yoshikazu Iida v Stadt Ulm [2013] OJ C 9/10.Google Scholar
  19. Case C-356/11 & C-357/11 O and S v Maahanmuuttovirasto and Maahanmuuttovirasto v L [2013] OJ C 26/19.Google Scholar
  20. 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
  21. 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
  22. 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
  23. Case C-457/12 S. v Minister voor Immigratie, Integratie en Asiel and Minister voor Immigratie, Integratie en Asiel v G. [2014] OJ C135/5.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

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

Personalised recommendations