logo czasopisma

Articles

online-first

The Joint Chamber of the Highest Courts and Tribunals of the EU as a Means of Resolving the Dispute over the “Final Say” in the EU Constitutional Order?

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36128/s4cqrc93
Submitted
23 September 2025
Published
19-12-2025

Abstract

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.

References

  1. Avbelj Matej, „Questioning EU Constitutionalisms” German Law Journal, nr 1 (2008): 1-26.
    View in Google Scholar
  2. Avbelj Matej, Jan Komárek, „Introduction”, [w:] Constitutional Pluralism in the European Union and Beyond, red. Matej Avbelj, Jan Komárek. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2012.
    View in Google Scholar
  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/.
    View in Google Scholar
  4. Bobić Ana, The Jurisprudence of Constitutional Conflict in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022.
    View in Google Scholar
  5. Claes Monica, The National Courts’ Mandate in the European Constitution. Oxford–Portland: Hart Publishing, 2006.
    View in Google Scholar
  6. Craig Paul, de Búrca Grainne, EU Law. Text, Cases, and Materials. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.
    View in Google Scholar
  7. Della Cananea Giachinto, L'Unione europea. Un ordinamento composito. Roma-Bari: Laterza 2003.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  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).
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  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).
    View in Google Scholar
  13. Mayer Franz C., Kompetenzberschreitung und Letztentscheidung, München: Beck, 2000.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  15. Pernice Ingolf, Franz Mayer, „De la constitution composeè de L'Europe” Revue trimestrielle de droit européen, nr 36 (2000): 623-647.
    View in Google Scholar
  16. Pyziak-Szafnicka Małgorzata, „Trybunał Konstytucyjny á rebours” Państwo i Prawo, nr 5 (2020): 25-45.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  18. Sadurski Wojciech, Poland's Constitutional Breakdown. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  23. von Bogdandy Armin, „Founding Principles”, [w:] Principles of European Constitutional Law, red. Armin von Bogdandy, Jürgen Bast. Oxford-Munich: Hart Publishing, 2010.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  26. https://verfassungsblog.de/the-comeback-of-the-mixed-chamber/; Doi: 10.17176/20231002-233631-0.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  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).
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar
  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.
    View in Google Scholar

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.