Multilingual Law and Judicial Interpretation in the EU

The purpose of this article is to assess how multilingualism affects judicial interpretation of EU law. In the EU, the European Court of Justice is in the position of having the final say on what EU norms mean. Therefore, the article looks into the case law of that Court. It is well known that all o...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Tamara Ćapeta
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Zagreb, Faculty of Law 2009-12-01
Series:Croatian Yearbook of European Law and Policy
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.cyelp.com/index.php/cyelp/article/view/88
id doaj-23bb65570b3848b8b68c71b7c6806798
record_format Article
spelling doaj-23bb65570b3848b8b68c71b7c68067982020-11-25T02:26:16ZengUniversity of Zagreb, Faculty of LawCroatian Yearbook of European Law and Policy1845-56621848-99582009-12-01511810.3935/cyelp.05.2009.88Multilingual Law and Judicial Interpretation in the EUTamara Ćapeta0University of ZagrebThe purpose of this article is to assess how multilingualism affects judicial interpretation of EU law. In the EU, the European Court of Justice is in the position of having the final say on what EU norms mean. Therefore, the article looks into the case law of that Court. It is well known that all official EU languages (23 of them at present) are authentic languages. Less known is what the related consequences are for interpretation in judicial proceedings. The first aim of the article is to find out what consequences the ECJ has drawn from this fact. Secondly, even though in some cases (eg CILFIT) the ECJ has postulated language comparison as a necessary step in construing the meaning of EU law, it is clear that such comparisons are not performed on a regular basis. Therefore, the article looks into when, on whose initiative, and for what purpose the Court performs a comparison of the same EU norm(s) expressed in different languages. The article then looks into what the Court does if discrepancies in different language versions are found, and concludes that such a problem is overcome by looking for the purpose of a legal norm. Finally, it is found that multilingualism does not significantly affect the manner and outcome of interpretation by the ECJ.https://www.cyelp.com/index.php/cyelp/article/view/88european court of justicemultilingualisminterpretation of eu lawlanguage comparison
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Tamara Ćapeta
spellingShingle Tamara Ćapeta
Multilingual Law and Judicial Interpretation in the EU
Croatian Yearbook of European Law and Policy
european court of justice
multilingualism
interpretation of eu law
language comparison
author_facet Tamara Ćapeta
author_sort Tamara Ćapeta
title Multilingual Law and Judicial Interpretation in the EU
title_short Multilingual Law and Judicial Interpretation in the EU
title_full Multilingual Law and Judicial Interpretation in the EU
title_fullStr Multilingual Law and Judicial Interpretation in the EU
title_full_unstemmed Multilingual Law and Judicial Interpretation in the EU
title_sort multilingual law and judicial interpretation in the eu
publisher University of Zagreb, Faculty of Law
series Croatian Yearbook of European Law and Policy
issn 1845-5662
1848-9958
publishDate 2009-12-01
description The purpose of this article is to assess how multilingualism affects judicial interpretation of EU law. In the EU, the European Court of Justice is in the position of having the final say on what EU norms mean. Therefore, the article looks into the case law of that Court. It is well known that all official EU languages (23 of them at present) are authentic languages. Less known is what the related consequences are for interpretation in judicial proceedings. The first aim of the article is to find out what consequences the ECJ has drawn from this fact. Secondly, even though in some cases (eg CILFIT) the ECJ has postulated language comparison as a necessary step in construing the meaning of EU law, it is clear that such comparisons are not performed on a regular basis. Therefore, the article looks into when, on whose initiative, and for what purpose the Court performs a comparison of the same EU norm(s) expressed in different languages. The article then looks into what the Court does if discrepancies in different language versions are found, and concludes that such a problem is overcome by looking for the purpose of a legal norm. Finally, it is found that multilingualism does not significantly affect the manner and outcome of interpretation by the ECJ.
topic european court of justice
multilingualism
interpretation of eu law
language comparison
url https://www.cyelp.com/index.php/cyelp/article/view/88
work_keys_str_mv AT tamaracapeta multilinguallawandjudicialinterpretationintheeu
_version_ 1724848240661102592