<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

<p>The article focuses on the substance and effects of judicial decisions. Judgements of domestic courts and those of the Court of Justice of the EU are examined separately in terms of their nature. Specifically, the article deals with the question of their binding effect and also whether they can be considered a source of Czech and EU law. The author discusses and questions the opinion, which is currently prevailing among Czech authors, that decisions of supreme courts should be considered binding and simultaneously a source of law comparable to precedents, as they are known in Anglo-American law. The article further points out that the alleged similarity between judgements rendered by the Czech courts and the Court of Justice of the EU is merely ostensible, as each of them has a different nature and effects in the Czech legal environment. The conclusion is, in simple terms, that judgements of domestic courts generally cannot be considered a source of law, that they do not contain any new legal norms and, finally, that they comprise merely a simple and changeable interpretation of legal norms created by the law-making body.</p>
</abstract>

The article focuses on the substance and effects of judicial decisions. Judgements of domestic courts and those of the Court of Justice of the EU are examined separately in terms of their nature. Specifically, the article deals with the question of their binding effect and also whether they can be considered a source of Czech and EU law. The author discusses and questions the opinion, which is currently prevailing among Czech authors, that decisions of supreme courts should be considered binding and simultaneously a source of law comparable to precedents, as they are known in Anglo-American law. The article further points out that the alleged similarity between judgements rendered by the Czech courts and the Court of Justice of the EU is merely ostensible, as each of them has a different nature and effects in the Czech legal environment. The conclusion is, in simple terms, that judgements of domestic courts generally cannot be considered a source of law, that they do not contain any new legal norms and, finally, that they comprise merely a simple and changeable interpretation of legal norms created by the law-making body.

The European Perspective on the Notion of Precedent – are EU and Czech Court Decisions Source of Law?

Ph.D., Faculty of Law, Masaryk University

European Studies

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

The article focuses on the substance and effects of judicial decisions. Judgements of domestic courts and those of the Court of Justice of the EU are examined...

The European Perspective on the Notion of Precedent – are EU and Czech Court Decisions Source of Law?

Online veröffentlicht: 19. Apr. 2023

Seitenbereich: 125 - 153

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/eustu-2022-0050

Schlüsselwörter
Court decision, Court of Justice of the EU decisions, Precedent, Source of Law, Persuasive Judgment, Binding Effect of the Judgment

© 2020 David Sehnálek, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

The European Perspective on the Notion of Precedent – are EU and Czech Court Decisions Source of Law?

Online veröffentlicht: 19. Apr. 2023

Seitenbereich: 125 - 153

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/eustu-2022-0050

SchlüsselwörterCourt decision, Court of Justice of the EU decisions, Precedent, Source of Law, Persuasive Judgment, Binding Effect of the Judgment

© 2020 David Sehnálek, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Schlüsselwörter
Court decision, Court of Justice of the EU decisions, Precedent, Source of Law, Persuasive Judgment, Binding Effect of the Judgment