'Opening Pandora's Box: Some Reflections on the Constitutional Effects of the Decision in Pupino'

Spaventa, E.

Abstract

Constitutional issues arising from the ruling in the Pupino case – Court of Justice holds that the duty of consistent interpretation applies also in relation to framework decisions – Analysis of the extent to which the doctrine of consistent interpretation can (and should) be transposed to the area of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters – Consequences for possible extension of other constitutional doctrines elaborated in the context of the first pillar to the third pillar – Extent to which third pillar acts can become a vehicle for the enforceability of fundamental rights as general principles of Union law – The possibility of invoking Francovich damages for breaches of Union law – To what extent can the Pupino reasoning be extended to the second pillar?

Citation

Spaventa, E. (2007). 'Opening Pandora's Box: Some Reflections on the Constitutional Effects of the Decision in Pupino'. European Constitutional Law Review, 3(1), 5-24. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1574019607000053

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Publication Date: Jan 1, 2007
• Deposit Date: Mar 14, 2012
• Publicly Available Date: Mar 23, 2012
• Journal: European Constitutional Law Review
• Print ISSN: 1574-0196
• Electronic ISSN: 1744-5515
• Publisher: Cambridge University Press
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 3
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 5-24
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s1574019607000053
• Keywords: Pupino, Consistent Interpretation, Constitutional Effects, Framework Decision, Third Pillar, Francovich, Second Pillar, European Court of Justice, Fundamental Rights, European Union.
• Public URL: https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1540924