Learning Outcomes
The aim of this curricular unit is to show the powerful interaction between theory and the practice of the law and to challenge the traditional division between "legal and poltical theory" and the "the practice of law".
On the one hand, we will show how even the most practical and technical cases can entail important theoretical decisions. On the other hand, we will see how these practical cases can inform a better theoretical debate. The purpose of this curricular unit is twofold: first, to achieve a better practice of law; one which is aware of its theoretical assumptions and informed by theory; second, to discuss different theories in the light of their practical consequences.
Syllabus
- The Limits of Law and Judicial Adjudication
C- 303/06, Coleman, Opinion and Judgment;
C-17/05, Cadman, Opinion and Judgment;
Joined Cases C‑120/06 P and C‑121/06 P, FIAMM and Fedon, Judgment.
- Pluralism and the Law
Case C-144/04, Mangold, Judgment;
Case C-127/07, Arcelor, Judgment.
- What’s in a Name? - The Importance of Constitutionalism
C-87/00, Roberto Nicoli v. Eridania SpA, Opinion and Judgment;
C-345/06, Gottfried Heinrich [Tennis Racket], Opinion;
C- 280/93, Germany v Council [Bananas], Judgement.
- Law and Polity Building
22/70 [AETR], Commission v. Council, Judgment;
Open Skies Judgments: Case C-466/98, Commission v. United Kingdom; C-467/98, Commission v. Denmark;
C-468/98, Commission v. Sweden; C-469/98, Commission v. Finland; C-471/98, Commission v. Belgium;
C-472/98, Commission v. Luxemburg; C-475/98, Commission v. Austria; C-476/98, Commission v. Germany, Judgments;
C- 205/06, Commission v. Austria and C-249/06, Commission v. Sweden, Opinion.
