Home -> Law Blog Directory -> International Law Blogs -> EU Law Blog

International Law

: EU Law Blog

Van Gend en Loos Revisited

By Bartolus

Here's an interesting article by Professor Daniel Halberstam of Michigan Law School that discusses Case 26-62 Van Gend en Loos and Marbury v. Madison.

This is what the abstract says:

The European Court of Justice's landmark decision in Van Gend en Loos is often casually compared to Marbury v. Madison simply because in each case a central high court declares itself to be the final arbiter of central government law. But there is a good deal more to the comparison than this. Both cases serve up what is perhaps the single most profound and complex issue in their respective constitutional systems: multiple competing claims of ultimate legal authority. In addressing this issue, both decisions make important claims for central judicial authority. And yet, neither decision successfully establishes a central judicial monopoly over final legal authority. Instead, both decisions inaugurate a tradition of mutual accommodation among the competing actors lasting to this very day. By juxtaposing accommodation in the two systems, we may understand these practices better than if we limit ourselves to only one or the other legal order. In particular, we recognize that actors in both systems rely on considerations of voice, expertise, and rights to manage the pluralist standoff.

You can download it here.

Well worth reading.

Full post as published by EU Law Blog on March 26, 2008 (boomark / email).