Proportionality test
This technique requires national judges to appreciate whether the domestic measure that interferes with a supranational/international norm (that grants a European fundamental right) pursues a legitimate aim, actually contributes to that aim and it is the least restrictive measure that can achieve it. This technique is possible only in relation to derogable fundamental rights, and for the purpose of balancing fundamental rights guarantees against national public policies or among different fundamental rights guarantees.
JUDCOOP CASE
Italy, Tribunal of Rovereto, 19 November 2015
Conflict:
Conflict of interpretation
Judicial interaction techniques:
Interpretative techniques - Consistent interpretation - Interaction between provisions - Proportionality test
Judicial interaction type:
Vertical interaction - External
Categories: Italy - European Court of Human Rights - National Courts - Ordinary Court - Art. 10 - Freedom of expression
JUDCOOP CASE
Romania, Curtea Constitu?ional? a României (Romanian Constitutional Court), 424 D/2014 & 478/D/2014, 8 july 2014
Conflict:
Judicial interaction techniques:
Interpretative techniques - Consistent interpretation - Comparative reasoning - Proportionality test
Judicial interaction type:
Horizontal interaction - External - Vertical interaction - External
Categories: Romania - Court of Justice of European Union - National Courts - Constitutional Court - Art. 7 - Respect for private and family life - Art. 11 - Freedom of expression and information - Art. 8 - Right to respect for private and family life - Art. 10 - Freedom of expression
JUDCOOP CASE
Romania, Înalta Curte de Casa?ie ?i Justi?ie, (High Court of Cassation and Justice), Case no. 3306/1/2015, Decision no. 37 of 7 December 2015
Conflict:
Conflict of interpretation
Judicial interaction techniques:
Interpretative techniques - Consistent interpretation - Interaction between rights - Proportionality test
Judicial interaction type:
Vertical interaction - External
Categories: Romania - National Courts - Constitutional Court - Art. 8 - Protection of personal data
JUDCOOP CASE
Ireland,Supreme Court, Minister for Justice & Equality v Ostrowski [2013] IESC 24, appellate, 15 May 2013, [2013] 5 JIC 1501
Conflict:
Conflict of interpretation
Judicial interaction techniques:
Interpretative techniques - Comparative reasoning - Interaction between rights - Proportionality test - Interaction between courts - Deferential approach - Dissenting judicial interpretation
Judicial interaction type:
Horizontal interaction - External
Categories: Ireland - National Courts - Supreme Court - Criminal law - Art. 7 - Respect for private and family life - Art. 8 - Right to respect for private and family life
JUDCOOP CASE
Estonia, Tallinn Circuit Court, Case no. 3-15-2379, Judgement of 23 December 2015
Conflict:
Conflict of interpretation
Judicial interaction techniques:
Interpretative techniques - Consistent interpretation - Interaction between rights - Proportionality test - Interaction between courts - Mutual adaptation of jurisprudence
Judicial interaction type:
Vertical interaction - External
Categories: Ordinary Court - Migration and asylum - Right to liberty and security - Art. 24 - The rights of the child - Art. 3 - Prohibition of torture - Art. 5 - Right to liberty and security
JUDCOOP CASE
European Union, CJEU, Weber & Putz, judgement 16 June 2011
Conflict:
Conflict of interpretation
Judicial interaction techniques:
Interpretative techniques - Consistent interpretation - Proportionality test - Interaction between courts - Preliminary ruling
Judicial interaction type:
National level - Internal - Vertical interaction - External
Categories: Germany - Court of Justice of European Union - National Courts - Supreme Court - Consumer protection - Art. 47 - Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial
JUDCOOP CASE
European Union, CJEU, Kusionova, judgement of 10 September 2014
Conflict:
Conflict of interpretation
Judicial interaction techniques:
Interpretative techniques - Consistent interpretation - Proportionality test - Interaction between courts - Preliminary ruling
Judicial interaction type:
Vertical interaction - External
Categories: Court of Justice of European Union - National Courts - Supreme Court - Ordinary Court - Consumer protection - Art. 7 - Respect for private and family life - Art. 38 - Consumer protection - Art. 47 - Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial
JUDCOOP CASE
Ireland, The High Court, Smith v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Judgement of 5 March 2012
Conflict:
Judicial interaction techniques:
Interpretative techniques - Consistent interpretation - Comparative reasoning - Interaction between provisions - Proportionality test
Judicial interaction type:
Horizontal interaction - External - Vertical interaction - External
Categories: Ireland - National Courts - Migration and asylum - Art. 7 - Respect for private and family life - Art. 21 - Non-discrimination - Art. 51 - Field of application - Art. 8 - Right to respect for private and family life
JUDCOOP CASE
United Kingdom, Upper Tribunal, ZAT and others case, judgement of
Conflict:
Conflict of interpretation
Judicial interaction techniques:
Interpretative techniques - Consistent interpretation - Interaction between rights - Proportionality test - Interaction between courts - Mutual adaptation of jurisprudence
Judicial interaction type:
Vertical interaction - External - Internal
Categories: United Kingdom - National Courts - Ordinary Court - Migration and asylum - Art. 7 - Respect for private and family life - Art. 24 - The rights of the child - Art. 8 - Right to respect for private and family life
JUDCOOP CASE
United Kingdom, High Court, Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation et al v British Telecommunications
Conflict:
Conflict of rights - Conflict of interpretation
Judicial interaction techniques:
Interpretative techniques - Consistent interpretation - Interaction between rights - Proportionality test - Interaction between courts - Mutual recognition - Mutual adaptation of jurisprudence
Judicial interaction type:
Horizontal interaction - External - National level - Internal - Vertical interaction - External
Categories: United Kingdom - National Courts - Supreme Court - Art. 10 - Freedom of expression
Project implemented with financial support of the Fundamental Rights & Citizenship Programme of the European Union
© European University Institute 2019
Villa Schifanoia - Via Boccaccio 121, I-50133 Firenze - Italy