Abstract
This article takes as its starting point the importance of the preliminary ruling as a fundamental instrument of the current multi-level European constitutionalism, since it allows for strengthening the basic principles of the rule of law at both the State level and the EU level (especially legal certainty, responsibility, due process of law and optimization of fundamental rights). With such a premise, a critical analysis of more than dubious strategies (not always apparently guided by good procedural faith) is carried out. Indeed, these strategies, by action or omission, breach Article 267 TFEU by challenging the fluid articulation of the European legal system (of national and supranational provisions) as well as the correct distribution of the European judicial power (between national and supranational courts) and, as a result, the optimal realization of the European system of fundamental rights. Finally, the paper concludes with proposals that seek to improve supranational judicial dialogue through a true spirit of collaboration supported by a solid training of judges in European law, a positive jurisdictional will (inspired by the favor libertatis principle), a re-dimension of the obligation to submit the preliminary ruling in the cases referred to in Article 267 TFEU and a specific discipline of a double preliminary ruling (both before the national Constitutional Court and before the Court of Justice).
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Quesada, L. J. (2017). La cuestión prejudicial europea ante planteamientos más que dudosos. Teoria y Realidad Constitucional, 39(1), 271–306. https://doi.org/10.5944/trc.39.2017.19154
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.