logo czasopisma

Artykuły

2026: online-first

Wspólna Izba Sądów Najwyższych i Trybunałów UE jako rozwiązanie sporu o „ostatnie słowo” w porządku konstytucyjnym UE?

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36128/s4cqrc93
Przesłane
23 września 2025
Opublikowane
19 grudnia 2025
Wersje

Abstrakt

One of the key issues in the relationship between EU law and national law is the question of which body – the Court of Justice of the European Union or the constitutional courts of the Member States – acts as the ultimate arbiter of the scope of EU competences. This issue has been reflected in two divergent answers: on the one hand, that of the CJEU, and on the other, that of certain constitutional courts of the Member States. In this context, particular attention should be given to the proposal to establish a Joint Chamber of Highest Courts and Tribunals of the EU, designed to resolve competence disputes of significant constitutional importance arising between the EU and a Member State. The purpose of this paper is to analyse this proposal, and in particular to assess whether it could provide a solution to the dispute over the “final say” in the EU constitutional order.

Bibliografia

  1. Avbelj Matej, „Questioning EU Constitutionalisms” German Law Journal, nr 1 (2008): 1-26.
  2. Avbelj Matej, Jan Komárek, „Introduction”, [w:] Constitutional Pluralism in the European Union and Beyond, red. Matej Avbelj, Jan Komárek. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2012.
  3. Bobić Ana, The Joint Chamber of the Highest Courts and Tribunals of the EU: An Appraisal. https://eulawlive.com/op-ed-the-joint-chamber-of-the-highest-courts-and-tribunals-of-the-eu-an-appraisal-by-ana-bobic/.
  4. Bobić Ana, The Jurisprudence of Constitutional Conflict in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022.
  5. Claes Monica, The National Courts’ Mandate in the European Constitution. Oxford–Portland: Hart Publishing, 2006.
  6. Craig Paul, de Búrca Grainne, EU Law. Text, Cases, and Materials. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.
  7. Della Cananea Giachinto, L'Unione europea. Un ordinamento composito. Roma-Bari: Laterza 2003.
  8. Garlicki Lech, „Die Ausschaltung des Verfassungsgerichtshofes in Polen? (Disabling the Constitutional Court in Poland?”, [w:] Transformation of Law Systems in Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe in 1989-2015, red. A. Szmyt, Bogusław Banaszak. 63-78. Gdańsk: Gdańsk University Press, 2016.
  9. Haltern Urlich, Theodor Schilling, Joseph H.H. Weiler, Who in the Law is the Ultimate Judicial Umpire of European Community Competences?. Cambridge: Harvard Law School, 1996. https://jeanmonnetprogram.org/archive/papers/96/9610.html.
  10. Kumm Matthias, “Who is the Final Arbiter of Constitutionality in Europe? Three Conceptions of the Relationship between the German Federal Constitutional Court and the European Court of Justice” Common Market Law Review, nr 2 (1999).
  11. Kustra Aleksandra, „An Illiberal Turn or a Counter-Constitutional Revolution? About the Polish Constitutional Tribunal before and after 2015”, [w:] Courts and Judicial Activism under Crisis Conditions. Policy Making in a Time of Illiberalism and Emergency Constitutionalism, red. Martin Belov. 101-124. London: Routledge, 2021.
  12. Maduro Miguel Poiares, “Europe and the Constitution: What if this is As Good As It Gets?” Webpapers on Constitutionalism & Governance Beyond the State, nr 5 (2000).
  13. Mayer Franz C., Kompetenzberschreitung und Letztentscheidung, München: Beck, 2000.
  14. Mayer Franz C., The European Constitution and the Courts. Adjudicating European Constitutional Law in a Multilevel System. Cambridge: Harvard Law School, 2003. https://jeanmonnetprogram.org/archive/papers/03/030901-03.html.
  15. Pernice Ingolf, Franz Mayer, „De la constitution composeè de L'Europe” Revue trimestrielle de droit européen, nr 36 (2000): 623-647.
  16. Pyziak-Szafnicka Małgorzata, „Trybunał Konstytucyjny á rebours” Państwo i Prawo, nr 5 (2020): 25-45.
  17. Report of the Franco-German Working Group on EU Institutional Reform: Sailing on High Seas: Reforming and Enlarging the EU for the 21st Century. https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/20230919_group_of_twelve_report_updated14.12.2023_cle88fb88.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
  18. Sadurski Wojciech, Poland's Constitutional Breakdown. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.
  19. Sołtys Agnieszka, „Cechy i charakter prawa unijnego oraz problem jego konstytucjonalizacji”, [w:] System Prawa Unii Europejskiej, t. I, Podstawy i źródła prawa UE, red. Stanisław Biernat. 199-287. Warszawa: C. H. Beck, 2020.
  20. Sołtys Agnieszka, „Spór o zasadę supremacji”, [w:] Studia z prawa europejskiego, w piątą rocznicę utworzenia Katedry Prawa Europejskiego Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, red. S. Biernat. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, 2000.
  21. Stanisław Biernat, „Trybunał Konstytucyjny wypowiada posłuszeństwo prawu Unii Europejskiej”, [w:] Wokół kryzysu praworządności, demokracji i praw człowieka. Księga jubileuszowa Profesora Mirosława Wyrzykowskiego, red. Adam Bodnar, Adam Ploszka. 817-834. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer, 2020.
  22. Tuleja Piotr, “The Polish Constitutional Tribunal”, [w:] The Max Planck Handbooks in European Public Law, t. III, Constitutional Adjudication: Institutions, red. Armin von Bogdandy, Peter M. Huber, Christoph Grabenwarter. 658-672. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.
  23. von Bogdandy Armin, „Founding Principles”, [w:] Principles of European Constitutional Law, red. Armin von Bogdandy, Jürgen Bast. Oxford-Munich: Hart Publishing, 2010.
  24. Wallerman Ghavanini Anna, „Power Talk: Effects of Inter-Court Disagreement on Legal Reasoning in the Preliminary Reference Procedure” European Papers, nr 2 (2020): 887-910.
  25. Weiler Joseph H.H., Daniel Sarmiento, „The Comeback of the Mixed Chamber: Institutional Reform and Competence Creep in an Enlarged Union” VerfBlog, 2 października 2023.
  26. https://verfassungsblog.de/the-comeback-of-the-mixed-chamber/; Doi: 10.17176/20231002-233631-0.
  27. Weiler Joseph H.H., Daniel Sarmiento, „The EU Judiciary After Weiss: Proposing A New Mixed Chamber of the Court of Justice” VerfBlog, 2 czerwca 2020. https://verfassungsblog.de/the-eu-judiciary-after-weiss/. Doi: 10.17176/20200602-133615-0.
  28. Weiler Joseph H.H., Daniel Sarmiento, The EU Judiciary After Weiss – Proposing A New Mixed Chamber of the Court of Justice. A Reply to Our Critics. https://eulawlive.com/the-eu-judiciary-after-weiss-proposing-a-new-mixed-chamber-of-the-court-of-justice-a-reply-to-our-critics-by-j-h-h-weiler-and-daniel-sarmiento.
  29. Weiler Joseph H.H., Urlich Haltern, “Constitutional or International? The Foundations of the Community Legal Order and the Question of Judicial Kompetenz-Kompetenz”, [w:] The European Courts and National Courts. Doctrine & Jurisprudence: Legal Change in its Social Context, red. Anne-Marie Slaugther, Alec Stone Sweet, Joseph H.H. Weiler. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 1998.
  30. Weiler Joseph H.H., Urlich Haltern, „The Autonomy of the Community Legal Order — Through the Looking Glass” Harvard International Law Journal, t. XXXVII (1996).
  31. Weiler Joseph H.H., Urlich Haltern, Franz Mayer, „European Democracy and its Critique”, [w:] The Crisis of Representation in Europe, ed. Jack Hayward. 4-39. London: Frank Cass, 1995.
  32. Wyrzykowski Mirosław, Michał Ziółkowski, „Illiberal Constitutionalism and the Judiciary in Poland”, [w:] Routledge Handbook of Illiberalism, red. András Sajó, Renáta Uitz, Stephen Holme. 272-285. London: Routledge, 2021.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.