Advertisement

The EU Judiciary in a New Era of Accountability

  • Marc Jaeger
Chapter

Abstract

One of the major concerns that have guided Carl Baudenbacher throughout his career, as a professor and as a judge, has been to root justice in social and economic reality and, therefore, to appreciate the results attained by a court against the expectations and needs to which that court is due to respond. This concern has been source of inspiration for this essay.

References

  1. Baudenbacher C (2008) Methods of interpretation – judicial dialogue. Introduction. In: Baudenbacher C, Busek E (eds) The role of international courts. German Law Publishers, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  2. Baudenbacher C (2016) The EFTA court: structure and tasks. In: Baudenbacher C (ed) The handbook of EEA law. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bovens M (2007) Analysing and assessing accountability: a conceptual framework. Eur Law J 13(4):447–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Collins M (2009) The time factor in proceedings. In: De 20 ans à l’horizon 2020. Bâtir le tribunal de demain sur de solides fondations. Office des publications de l’Union européenne, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  5. Contini F, Mohr R (2008) Reconciling independence and accountability in judicial systems. Utrecht Law Rev 3(2):27–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Frydman B, Jeuland E (2011) In: Frydman B, Jeuland E (eds) Le nouveau management de la justice et l’indépendance des juges. Dalloz, Paris, pp 5–11Google Scholar
  7. Jaeger M (2009) The Court of first instance and the management of competition law litigation. In: Kanninen H, Korjus N, Rosas A (eds) EU competition law in context. Essays in honour of Virpi Tiili. Hart Publishing, Oxford, pp 1–17Google Scholar
  8. Jaeger M (2017) 25 years of the general court: looking back and forward. In: Tomljenović V, Bodiroga-Vukobrat N, Butorac Malnar V, Kunda I (eds) EU competition and state aid rules. Europeanization and globalization, vol 3. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  9. Jeuland E (2011) Le renouveau du principe du juge naturel et l’industrialisation de la justice. In: Frydman B, Jeuland E (eds) Le nouveau management de la justice et l’indépendance des juges. Dalloz, Paris, pp 87–101Google Scholar
  10. Krenn C (2017) The European Court of Justice’s financial accountability: how the European Parliament incites and monitors judicial reform through the budgetary process. Eur Constit Law Rev 13(3):453–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lambert-Abdelgawad E (2016) La mesure de la performance judiciaire de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme: une logique managériale à tout prix. Revue française d’administration publique 159(3):819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ravarani G (2011) Peut-on mesurer la qualité de la justice? In: De 20 ans à l’horizon 2020. Bâtir le tribunal de demain sur de solides fondations. Office des publications de l’Union européenne, Luxembourg, pp 49–55Google Scholar
  13. Rousseau D (2011) Exigences constitutionnelles de l’indépendance de la justice. In: Frydman B, Jeuland E (eds) Le nouveau management de la justice et l’indépendance des juges. Dalloz, Paris, pp 57–63Google Scholar
  14. Sauvé J-M (2016) La qualité de la justice administrative. Revue française d’administration publique 159(3):667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Severin E (2010) Comment l’esprit du management est venu à l’administration de la justice. In: Nouveau management de la justice et l’indépendance des juges. Dalloz, ParisGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marc Jaeger
    • 1
  1. 1.General Court of the European UnionLuxembourg CityLuxembourg

Personalised recommendations