Abstract
The close relationship between law and language is obvious. In order to communicate and make ourselves understandable and intelligible, we have to choose a common instrument, a language among all those which are spoken in our world. What are the reasons for this choice, and are they in any way linked to the general question on the relation between law and language?
Former President of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
An edited version of this text has been published on http://law-journal.de/archiv/jahrgang-2016/heft-2/law-and-languages/ and the lecture was given at the ATLAS AGORA 2016 conference at Bucerius Law School, Hamburg.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Federal Union of European Nationalities (2014), Linguistic diversity and multilingualism in Europe, p. 9 f. Available on www.fuen.org.
- 2.
Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A New Framework Strategy for Multilingualism COM(2005) 596 final (22.11.2005).
- 3.
For a detailed analysis, see Gazzola (2006), p. 393 f.
- 4.
Case C-361/01 P Christina Kik v. OHIM, ECLI:EU:C:2003:434 para. 87.
- 5.
For further information, see Gazzola (2006), p. 402 f.
- 6.
Ajani and Rossi (2006), p. 84.
- 7.
For extensive analysis and examples on semantic divergence, see Taylor (2011), p. 105 f.
- 8.
Schilling (2010), p. 48.
- 9.
Guilloud-Colliat (2014), p. 1362.
- 10.
On this question, see Taylor (2011), p. 114 f.
- 11.
Case C-296/95 The Queen v Commissioners of Customs and Excise, ex parte EMU Tabac and Others, ECLI:EU:C:1998:152, para. 36.
- 12.
Case 283/81 CILFIT v Ministero della Sanità, ECLI:EU:C:1982:335, p. 18.
- 13.
Case 166/73 Rheinmühlen Düsseldorf v Einfuhr- und Vorratsstelle für Getreide und Futtermittel, ECLI:EU:C:1974:3, p. 2.
- 14.
Case 9/79 Koschniske v Raad van Arbeid, ECLI:EU:C:1979:201, p. 6.
- 15.
Case 30/77 Regina v Bouchereau, ECLI:EU:C:1977:172, p. 14, and case C-372/88, Milk Marketing Board v Cricket St Thomas, ECLI:EU:C:1990:140, p. 19.
References
Ajani G, Rossi P (2006) Multilingualism and the coherence of European private law. In: Pozzo B, Jacometti V (eds) Multilingualism and the harmonization of European law. Kluwer Law International, pp 79–93
Gazzola M (2006) Managing multilingualism in the European Union: language policy evaluation for the European Parliament. Lang Policy 5:393 f
Guilloud-Colliat L (2014) Le multilinguisme dans le fonctionnement institutionnel de l’Union européenne. RDP 5:1362
Schilling T (2010) Beyond multilingualism: on different approaches to handling of diverging language versions of a community law. Eur Law J 1:48
Taylor S (2011) The European Union and national legal languages: an awkward partnership? RFLA 1:105 f
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Skouris, V. (2019). Law and Language(s). In: Selvik, G., Clifton, MJ., Haas, T., Lourenço, L., Schwiesow, K. (eds) The Art of Judicial Reasoning. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02553-3_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02553-3_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-02552-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-02553-3
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)