European “Judicial Monologue” of the Czech Constitutional Court – a Critical Review of its approach to the Preliminary Ruling Procedure

AMALFITANO, Chiara. Two Courts, two Languages? The Taricco Saga Ends on a Worrying Note. [online]. Available https://verfassungsblog.de/ Accessed: 25.11.2019.Search in Google Scholar

BOBEK, Michal., KOMÁREK, Jan., PASSER, M., Jan, GILLIS, M. Předběžná otázka v komunitárním právu. Praha: LINDE Praha, 2005.Search in Google Scholar

BUDINSKA, Barbora, VIKARSKA, Zuzana. Judicial dialogue after Taricco II: who has the last word, in the end? EU Law Analysis, 7. 12. 2017.Search in Google Scholar

CLAES, Monica. The Validity and Primacy of EU Law and the ‘Cooperative Relationship’ between National Constitutional Courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. 2016, vol. 23, no. 1, p. 170, pp. 151–170.Search in Google Scholar

GEORGIEV, Jiří. The Constitutional Review of the OMT Programme – The German Case. In: ŠIŠKOVÁ, Naděžda. The European Union – What is Next? Wolters Kluwer: Köln, 2018, p.165 et seq.Search in Google Scholar

HAMUĽÁK, Ondrej, KOPAL, David, KERIKMÄE, Tanel. Walking a Tightrope – Looking Back on Risky Position of German Federal Constitutional Court in OMT Preliminary Question. European Studies: the review of European law, economics and politics, 2016, vol. 3, pp. 115–141.Search in Google Scholar

HAMUĽÁK, Ondrej, Lessons from the “Constitutional Mythology” or How to Reconcile the Concepts of State Sovereignty with European Integration. DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 75–90.10.1515/danb-2015-0005Search in Google Scholar

HAMUĽÁK, Ondrej, The Unbearable Lightness of Being Guardian of the Constitution (Revolt and Revolution Dilemma in the Approach of Czech Constitutional Court Visà-Vis EU and Supranational Legal Order). European studies – The Review of European Law, Economics and Politics, vol. 1, pp. 103–112.Search in Google Scholar

HAMUĽÁK, Ondrej. Flexibilita ústavního pořádku, právo Evropské unie a marginalia k Listině základních práv Evropské unie (Flexibility of constitutional order, EU law and marginality to the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights). In Mlsna, P. (ed.). Ústava ČR – vznik, vývoj a perspektivy. Praha: Leges, 2011, pp. 288–308.Search in Google Scholar

HAMUĽÁK, Ondrej. Právo Evropské unie v judikatuře Ústavního soudu České republiky: reflexe členství a otázek evropského práva v ústavní judikatuře. Prague: Leges, 2010.Search in Google Scholar

HAMUĽÁK, Ondrej. The Czech Constitutional Court and the Question of an Active Use of the Preliminary Ruling Procedure. In R. Somssich (ed.) Central and Eastern European Countries after and before the Accession, Volume 2. Budapest: ELTE, pp. 121–128.Search in Google Scholar

HAMUĽÁK, Ondrej. The Unbearable Lightness of Being Guardian of the Constitution (Revolt and Revolution Dilemma in the Approach of Czech Constitutional Court Visà-Vis EU and Supranational Legal Order). European studies – The Review of European Law, Economics and Politics. 2014, vol. 1, pp. 103–112.Search in Google Scholar

HAMUĽÁK, Ondrej; KERIKMÄE, Tanel. Indirect Effect of EU Law under Constitutional Scrutiny – the Overview of Approach of Czech Constitutional Court. International and Comparative Law Review, 2016, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 69–82.10.1515/iclr-2016-0005Search in Google Scholar

HAMUĽÁK, Ondrej; SULYOK, Márton, KISS, Lilla, Nóra. Measuring the ‘EU’clidean Distance between EU Law and the Hungarian Constitutional Court – Focusing on the Position of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Czech Yearbook of Public and Private International Law, 2019, vol. 10, pp. 130–150.Search in Google Scholar

KELEMEN, R. Daniel. On the Unsustainability of Constitutional Pluralism European Supremacy and the Survival of the Eurozone. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. 2016, vol. 23, issue 1, pp. 136–150.Search in Google Scholar

KUSTRA, Aleksandra. The first preliminary questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union referred by Italian Corte Costituzionale, Spanish Tribunal Constitucional, and French Conseil Constitutionnel. Comparative Law Review, Toruń: Faculty of Law, Mikulas Kopernik University, vol. 16, 2013, p. 159–182.10.12775/CLR.2013.021Search in Google Scholar

LOHSE, E., Julia, The German Constitutional Court and Preliminary References – Still a Match not Made in Heaven? German Law Journal. vol. 16, issue 6, 2015.10.1017/S2071832200021234Search in Google Scholar

MALENOVSKÝ, Jiří, Ambivalentní komunikace a spolupráce Soudního dvora EU a ústavních soudů jejích členských států in GÖTTINGER Vlastimil (ed.) Book of proceedings from international conference EUROPEAN CONSTITUTIONALISM IN THE CONTEXT OF JUDICIAL DIALOGUE, Brno: Ústavní soud, 2016, pp. 66–73.Search in Google Scholar

MALENOVSKÝ, Jiří. Protichůdné zájmy v řízení o předběžné otázce a jejich důsledky. Právní rozhledy, 2019, no. 6, pp. 191–197.Search in Google Scholar

MALENOVSKÝ, Jiří: 60 let Evropských společenství: od francouzského „supranacionálního” smluvního projektu k jeho německému „podústavnímu” provádění. Právník: Teoretický časopis pro otázky státu a práva, 2012, vol. 151, no. 7, pp. 673–722.Search in Google Scholar

NAVRÁTILOVÁ, Markéta. The preliminary ruling before the constitutional courts, In TÝČ Vladimír (ed.): International and European Dimension of Law Applied by Institutions of Member States, Brno: Masaryk University: 2008, pp. 695–705Search in Google Scholar

PICCIRILLI, Giovanni. The ‘Taricco Saga’: The Italian Constitutional Court continues its European journey: Italian Constitutional Court, Order of 23 November 2016 no. 24/2017; Judgment of 10 April 2018 no. 115/2018 ECJ 8 September 2015, Case C-105/14, Ivo Taricco and Others; 5 December 2017, Case C-42/17, M.A.S. and M.B. European Constitutional Law Review, 2018, vol. 14, n. 4., pp. 814–833.Search in Google Scholar

SCHEU, Harald, Christian. Koncepce komunitárního práva v praxi Evropského soudního dvora a v právní teorii. Mezinárodní vztahy, 2002, no. 1, p. 15–19.Search in Google Scholar

SEHNÁLEK, David. Specifika výkladu práva Evropské unie a jeho vnitrostátní důsledky. Prague: C.H.Beck, 2019.Search in Google Scholar

STEHLÍK, V., SEHNÁLEK, David, The Use of the Preliminary Ruling Procedure by Czech Courts: Historical Retrospective and Beyond, Baltic Journal of European Studies, no. 4, 2019.10.1515/bjes-2019-0041Search in Google Scholar

STEHLÍK, Václav. Aplikace národních procesních předpisů v kontextu práva Evropské unie. Prague: Leges, 2012.Search in Google Scholar

STEHLÍK, Václav. Constitutional review and the preliminary ruling procedure: Commentary on the CCB decision of the Czech Constitutional Court. Czech Yearbook of International Law, 2019, pp. 117–129.Search in Google Scholar

STEHLÍK, Václav. Ohlédnutí se (nejen) za řízením o předběžné otázce v prvních 15 letech členství České republiky v Evropské unii In KYSELOVSKÁ, Tereza et al. (eds.) In varietate concordia: soubor vědeckých statí k poctě prof. Vladimíra Týče. Brno: Masaryk University, pp. 347–366.Search in Google Scholar

STEHLÍK, Václav. The obligatory preliminary ruling procedure and its enforcement in the Czech and Slovak legal order. UWM Law Review. Olsztyn: University of Warmia and Mazury, n. 3, 2011, pp. 6–25.Search in Google Scholar

VIKARSKÁ, Zuzana. O daňových podvodníkoch a ústavnej identite (Taricco II) [online]. Available http://jinepravo.blogspot.com Accessed: 25.11.2019.Search in Google Scholar

ZEMÁNEK, Jiří. České ústavní soudnictví v evropském ústavním prostoru in Vlastimil Göttinger (ed.) Book of proceedings from international conference EUROPEAN CONSTITUTIONALISM IN THE CONTEXT OF JUDICIAL DIALOGUE. Brno: Ústavní soud, 2016, p. 88–99.Search in Google Scholar