Mapping Systematization in EU Law

Purnhagen, Kai

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-6543-6_2

Kai Purnhagen⁴

Part of the book series: Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice ((IUSGENT,volume 26))

540 Accesses
3 Citations

Abstract

Systematization of EU law follows, with regard to its formal feature, the same line as systematization in the nation-state. The different casuistic used for systematization in the nation-state hence also applies at EU level, although not showing the same intensity in its drive towards codification. However, the substantive requirement differs. While systematization in the nation-state aimed at identifying a nation, systematization in the EU is based on the establishment of an internal market. Instead of building on les grand idées, EU law formalizes the interaction of market players and finds problem-oriented solutions from challenges arising specifically from the establishment of the internal market. Understood in this way, legal systematization in the EU forms a somewhat different, typically European idea of systematization, which may hence not be viewed as a new species, but moreover as a mutation of the same species.

A system is a network of interdependent components that work together to try to accomplish the aim of the system. A system must have an aim. Without the aim, there is no system.

–William Edwards Deming

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 84.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 109.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 109.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
G. Majone, ‘Europe’s “Democratic Deficit”: The Question of Standards’, European Law Journal, No. 4, 1998, p. 13.
2.
G. Sydow, Verwaltungskooperation in der Europäischen Union, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2004, pp. 119 et seqq.; J. Basedow, ‘The Challenge of Recodification Worldwide: Transjurisdictional Codification’, Tulane Law Review, No. 83, 2009, p. 974; R. Zimmermann, ‘Savigny’s Legacy, Comparative Law, and the Emergence of a European Legal Science’, Law Quarterly Review, No. 112, 1996, pp. 567 et seqq.
3.
See especially the Conclusions of the European Council in Edinburgh in 11–12 December 1992, p. 37 et seqq.; Commission, ‘Follow-up to the Sutherland Report – Legislative Consolidation to Enhance the Transparency of Community Law in the Area of the Internal Market’ COM(93) 361 final; ‘Sutherland Report’, The Internal Market After 1992– Meeting the Challenge, Report to the EEC Commission by the High Level Group on the Operation of Internal Market, presided over by Peter Sutherland – October 28, 1992, SEC(92), 2044, especially sec. I, criteria 4, and sec. II; European Governance – A white paper, COM(2001) 428 final; the Commission’s website on ‘Better Regulation’, available at http://ec.europa.eu/governance/better_regulation/simplification_en.htm.
4.
W. Voermans/C. Moll/N. Floijn/P. v. Lochem, ‘Codification and Consolidation in the European Union: A Means to Untie Red Tape’, Statute Law Review, 2008, No. 29, pp. 65 et seqq.; C. Joerges, ‘The Europeanisation of Private Law as a Rationalisation Process and as a Contest of Disciplines – an Analysis of the Directive on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts’, European Review of Private Law, No. 3, 1995, pp. 175 et seqq.; J. Wiener, ‘Better Regulation in Europe’, Current Legal Problems, No. 59, 2006, esp. pp. 497 et seqq. A fortunate exception is J. Bengoetxea, ‘Legal System as a Regulative Ideal’, in: Koch/ Neumann (eds.), Praktische Vernunft und Rechtsanwendung, ARSP-Beiheft 53, 1994, pp. 65 et seqq.
5.
M. Dawson, New Governance and the Proceduralisation of European Law: The Case of the Open Method of Coordination, Diss EUI Florence, 2009, p. 248.
6.
In this respect already, albeit using a more reserved language S. Grundmann, ‘Das Thema Systembildung im Europäischen Privatrecht – Gesellschafts-, Arbeits- und Schuldvertragsrecht’, in: Grundmann (ed.), Systembildung und Systemlücken in Kerngebieten des Europäischen Privatrechts, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2000, p. 1, pp. 2 et seqq.
7.
See for a description of the term ‘West’ H.-J. Berman, Law and Revolution, Cambridge (MA), Harvard University Press, 1983, pp. 1–7.
8.
See for a comprehensive overview of the recent development D. Kennedy, ‘The Disenchantment of Logically Formal Legal Rationality or Max Weber’s Sociology in the Genealogy of the Contemporary Mode of Western Legal Thought’, Hastings Law Journal, No. 55, 2004b, pp. 1031 et seqq.
9.
This subsection necessarily provides only a very limited overview. See for a comprehensive account on the history, meaning and impact of systematization the illuminating study of H.-J. Berman, Law and Revolution, Cambridge (MA), Harvard University Press, 1983; id., Law and Revolution II, Cambridge (MA), The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2003.
10.
See M. Maier, Justinian – Herrschaft, Reich und Religion, München, C.H. Beck, 2004, p. 41.
11.
M. Maier, Justinian – Herrschaft, Reich und Religion, München, C.H. Beck, 2004, pp. 41 et seqq.
12.
See inter alia R. van Caenegem, European Law in the Past and Future, Cambridge, University Press, 2002, 13; J. Schapp, ‘Einführung in das Bürgerliche Recht: Die Anspruchsnormen und ihre Anwendung’, in: J. Schapp (ed.), Methodenlehre und System des Rechts, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2009a, pp. 54 et seqq.
13.
See in this respect also R. Zimmermann, ‘Codification: history and present significance of an idea’, European Review of Private Law, No. 3, 1995, p. 96.
14.
H.-J. Berman, Law and Revolution, Cambridge (MA), Harvard University Press, 1983, p. 50.
15.
H.-J. Berman, Law and Revolution, Cambridge (MA), Harvard University Press, 1983.
16.
J. Bengoetxea, Legal System as a Regulative Ideal, in: Koch/Neumann (eds.), Praktische Vernunft und Rechtsanwendung, ARSP-Beiheft 53, 1994, p. 65, at 71; J. Schapp, ‘Einführung in das Bürgerliche Recht: Die Anspruchsnormen und ihre Anwendung’, in: J. Schapp (ed.), Methodenlehre und System des Rechts, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2009a, pp. 54 et seqq.
17.
In fact, quite the contrary was true. Roman jurists looked at individual cases through the lens of practical economy, see further on this J. Dawson, Oracles of The Law, Ann Arbor (MI), William S Hein & Co, 1986, pp. 114 et seqq.
18.
See R. Caenegem, European Law in the Past and Future, Cambridge, University Press, 2002, 1–25. See particularly for German and French law B. Markensis/H. Unberath/A. Johnston, The German Law of Contract, Oxford, Hart, 2006, 6–25.
19.
J. Basedow, ‘The Challenge of Recodification Worldwide: Transjurisdictional Codification’, Tulane Law Review, No. 83, 2009, p. 974, put it this way: “Over time, statutory respones to social change often create a jungle, impenetrable even for the most knowledgeable and sophisticated lawyers.”
20.
See in this respect H.-J. Berman, Law and Revolution, Cambridge (MA), Harvard University Press, 1983, pp. 1–7.; A. Schiavello, ‘On “Coherence” and “Law”: An Analysis of Different Models’ (2001), Ratio Juris, No. 14, 2004, p. 235 even defines law as being systematic per se. He summarises that “in the legal field the topic of coherence has always occupied a central place, probably because of the systematic nature of law.”
21.
L. Fuller, Anatomy of the Law, New York: Frederick A. Praeger; London: The Pall Mall Press, 1968, 94.
22.
A. Barak, The Judge in a Democracy, Princeton, NJ, University Press, 2006, p. 12.
23.
See inter alia C. Callies/P. Zumbansen, Rough Consensus and Running Code, Oxford, Hart, 2010; S. Prechal/B. v. Roermund (eds.), The Coherence of EU Law – The Search for Unity in Divergent Concepts, Oxford, University Press, 2008; R. Alexy/A. Peczenik, ‘The Concept of Coherence and Its Significance for Discursive Rationality’, Ratio Juris, No. 3, 1990, pp. 130 et seqq.; G. Betlem, ‘The Doctrine of Consistent Interpretation – Managing Legal Uncertainty’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, No. 22, 2002, pp. 397 et seqq.; S. Bertea, ‘The Arguments from Coherence: Analysis and Evaluation’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, No. 25. 2005, pp. 369 et seqq.; D. Kennedy, ‘Thoughts on Coherence, Social Values and National Traditions in Private Law’, in: M. Hesselink (ed.), The Politics of a European Civil Code, Den Haag, Kluwer International, 2006, pp. 9 et seqq.; A. Schiavello, ‘On “Coherence” and “Law”: An Analysis of Different Models’, Ratio Juris, No. 14, 2001, pp. 233 et seqq.; J. Raz, ‘The Relevance of Coherence’, in J. Raz (ed.), Ethics in the Public Domain. Essays in the Morality of Law and Politics, Oxford (MA), University Press.
24.
See especially L. Friedman/G. Teubner, ‘Legal Education and Legal Integration’, in: Cappelletti/Seccombe/Weiler (eds.), Integration Through Law – Europe an the Federal Experience, Vol. 1, Book 3, Berlin/New York, Welter de Gruyter, 1986, pp. 370 et seqq.
25.
J. Russel, ‘The Critical Legal Studies Challenge to Contemporary Mainstream Legal Philosophy’, Ottawa Law Review, No. 18, p. 1, at p. 3.
26.
R. Unger, ‘The Critical Legal Studies Movement’, Harvard Law Review, No. 96, 1983, p. 561, at p. 563.
27.
J. Russel, ‘The Critical Legal Studies Challenge to Contemporary Mainstream Legal Philosophy’, Ottawa Law Review, No. 18, p. 1, at p. 18; L. Schwartz, ‘With Gun and Camera Through Darkest CLS-Land’, Stanford Law Review, No. 36, 1984, p. 413, at p. 431.
28.
O. Holmes, The Common Law, Boston 1881, p. 41.
29.
R. Unger, ‘The Critical Legal Studies Movement’, Harvard Law Review, No. 96, 1983, p. 564.
30.
See especially D. Kennedy, Legal Education and the Reproduction of Hierarchy: A Polemic Against the System: A Critical Edition, New York, New York University Press, 2004a; D. Trubek, ‘Where the Action is: Critical Legal Studies and Empiricism’, Stanford Law Review, No. 36, 1984, pp. 575 et seqq.
31.
J. Bell, French Legal Cultures, London, Butterworths, 2001, 5.
32.
J. Bengoetxea, Legal System as a Regulative Ideal, in: Koch/Neumann (eds.), Praktische Vernunft und Rechtsanwendung, ARSP-Beiheft 53, 1994, p. 65, at p. 71.
33.
J. Bengoetxea, Legal System as a Regulative Ideal, in: Koch/ Neumann (eds.), Praktische Vernunft und Rechtsanwendung, ARSP-Beiheft 53, 1994, p. 65, at p. 71.
34.
J. Bell, French Legal Cultures, London, Butterworths, 2001, p. 5 highlights both possibilities.
35.
See inter alia R. van Caenegem, European Law in the Past and Future, Cambridge, University Press, 2002, pp. 89 et seqq.
36.
See especially T. Ackermann, ‘Public Supply of Optional Standardized Consumer Contracts: A Rationale for the Common European Sales Law?’, Common Market Law Review, No. 50, 2013, p. 11; V. Nourse/G. Shaffer, ‘Varieties of New Legal Realism: Can a New World Order Prompt a New Legal Theory?’, Cornell Law Review, No. 95, 2009, p. 64, who emphasise that neither law and economics, simple legal doctrine nor CLS may be equipped to finding answers to contemporary challenges.
37.
G. Sydow, Verwaltungskooperation in der Europäischen Union, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2004, p. 118.
38.
See later in this Chapter.
39.
A. v. Bogdandy, ‘Founding Principles’, in: v. Bogdandy/Bast (eds.), Principles of European Constitutional Law, Oxford/München/Baden-Baden, Hart/C.H. Beck/Nomos, 2nd ed., 2010, pp. 11, at p. 15.
40.
R. van Caenegem, European Law in the Past and Future, Cambridge, University Press, 2002, pp. 90 et seqq.
41.
See A. v. Bogdandy, ‘Founding Principles’, in: v. Bogdandy/Bast (eds.), Principles of European Constitutional Law, Oxford/München/Baden-Baden, Hart/C.H. Beck/Nomos, 2nd ed., 2010, pp. 11, at p. 15.
42.
See D. Kennedy, ‘The Disenchantment of Logically Formal Legal Rationality or Max Weber’s Sociology in the Genealogy of the Contemporary Mode of Western Legal Thought’, Hastings Law Journal, No. 55, 2004b, p. 1033.
43.
See R. Kiesow, ‘Rechtswissenschaft – was ist das?’, Juristenzeitung, 2010, pp. 585 et. seqq.
44.
R. Zimmermann, ‘Savigny’s Legacy, Comparative Law, and the Emergence of a European Legal Science’, Law Quarterly Review, No. 112, 1996, pp. 567 et seqq.
45.
C. v. Savigny, System des heutigen römischen Rechts, Aalen, Scientia, 1981 (reprint from original 1840), p. 9.
46.
A. v. Bogdandy, ‘Founding Principles’, in: v. Bogdandy/Bast (eds.), Principles of European Constitutional Law, Oxford/München/Baden-Baden, Hart/C.H. Beck/Nomos, 2nd ed., 2010, pp. 11, at p. 15.
47.
Wherever the contextual interpretation of Weber’s thought deems it to be necessary, I will quote secondary literature instead of Weber’s original writing in order to explain Weber’s thinking.
48.
H. Collins, Regulating Contracts, Oxford, University Press, 2005, p. 194.
49.
D. Trubek, ‘Max Weber on Law and the Rise of Capitalism’, Wisconsin Law Review, 1972, p. 724.
50.
D. Trubek, ‘Max Weber on Law and the Rise of Capitalism’, Wisconsin Law Review, 1972, p. 724.
51.
T. Raiser, ‘Max Weber und die Rationalität des Rechts’, in Juristenzeitung, Vol. 63 (2008), pp. 853–859, at p. 854.
52.
See in this respect also W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidentalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, pp. 132, p. 143.
53.
M. Weber, Economy and Society, Roth/Wittich (eds.), E. Fischoff et al. (trans.), Vol. II, Berkeley (CA), University of California Press, 1978, p. 883; D. Trubek, ‘Max Weber on Law and the Rise of Capitalism’, Wisconsin Law Review, 1972, p. 725; H.-J. Berman, Law and Revolution, Cambridge (MA), Harvard University Press, 1983, p. 11.
54.
M. Weber, Economy and Society, Roth/Wittich (eds.), E. Fischoff et. al. (trans.), Vol. II, Berkeley (CA), University of California Press, 1978, p. 26.
55.
M. Weber, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriß der Verstehenden Soziologie, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1922, p. 492.
56.
M. Weber, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriß der Verstehenden Soziologie, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1922, p. 363, translation as provided by M. Weber, Economy and Society, Roth/Wittich (eds.), E. Fischoff et al. (trans.), Vol. II, Berkeley (CA), University of California Press, 1978, p. 656.
57.
M. Weber, Economy and Society, Roth/Wittich (eds.), E. Fischoff et al. (trans.), Vol. II, Berkeley (CA), University of California Press, 1978, p. 657.
58.
M. Weber, Economy and Society, Roth/Wittich (eds.), E. Fischoff et al. (trans.), Vol. II, Berkeley (CA), University of California Press, 1978, p. 656.
59.
M. Weber, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriß der Verstehenden Soziologie, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1956, p. 504, translation by author.
60.
W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidentalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 143.
61.
W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidentalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 143.
62.
T. Raiser, ‘Max Weber und die Rationalität des Rechts’, in Juristenzeitung, Vol. 63 (2008), pp. 853–859, at p. 854.
63.
W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidentalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 143.
64.
W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidentalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 143.
65.
W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidentalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 143.
66.
M. Weber, Economy and Society, Roth/Wittich (eds.), E. Fischoff et. al. (trans.), Vol. I, Berkeley (CA), University of California Press, 1978, p. 217, cited after W. Schluchter, The Rise of Western Rationalism – Max Weber’s Developmental History, G. Roth (trans.), Berkeley (CA), University of California Press, 1981, pp. 107 et seqq.
67.
In this sense also K. Mathis, ‘Cultures of Administrative Law in Europe: From Weberian Bureaucracy to ‘Law and Economics’, in: Helleringer/Purnhagen (eds.), Towards a European Legal Culture, München/Oxford/Baden-Baden, 2013 (forthcoming).
68.
K. Mathis, ‘Cultures of Administrative Law in Europe: From Weberian Bureaucracy to ‘Law and Economics’, in: Helleringer/Purnhagen (eds.), Towards a European Legal Culture, München/Oxford/Baden-Baden, 2013 (forthcoming), with reference to E. Pankoke/H. Nokielski, Verwaltungssoziologie, Stuttgart et al., Kohlhammer, 1977, 13 et seqq.
69.
See to this end C. Joerges, ‘The Europeanisation of European Private Law as a Rationalisation Process and a Contest of Disciplines – an Analysis of the Directive on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts’, European Review of Private Law, 1995, p. 179 et seqq.; H.-W. Micklitz, ‘Some Considerations on Cassis de Dijon and the Control of Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts’, in: Boele-Woelki/Grosheide (eds.), The Future of European Contract Law: Essays in Honour of Ewoud Hondius, 2007, New York, Wolters Kluwer Aspen Publishing, p. 387.
70.
W. Schluchter already rightfullly highlighted that each of Weber’s sociological analysis need to be evaluated in context with the others. Particularly the analysis of authority and the one of law need to be evaluated jointly, see W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidentalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 136.
71.
M. Weber, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriß der Verstehenden Soziologie, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1922, pp. 3 et seqq., 10 et seqq.
72.
D. Kennedy, ‘The Disenchantment of Logically Formal Legal Rationality or Max Weber’s Sociology in the Genealogy of the Contemporary Mode of Western Legal Thought’, Hastings Law Journal, No. 55, 2004b, p. 1036.
73.
M. Weber, Economy and Society, Vol. II, Berkeley (CA), University of California Press, 1978, p. 657 (G. Roth/C. Wittich, eds.).
74.
I am indebted to G. Sydow, from whom I borrowed the terminological combination of systematization through modelling (‘Systembildung an Hand von Modellen’) and systematization through their application to reference areas (‘Systembildung an Hand von Referenzgebieten’), see G. Sydow, Verwaltungskooperation in der Europäischen Union, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2004, p. 119 et seqq.
75.
G. Sydow, Verwaltungskooperation in der Europäischen Union, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2004, p. 119 et seqq., who also provides an overview of the different functions commonly associated with such systematization.
76.
W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidentalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 132.
77.
See Conclusions of the European Council in Edinburgh in 11–12 December 1992, p. 37 (Fn. 1).
78.
Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts, OJ C 102, 4.4.1996, p. 2–3.
79.
W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidentalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 132.
80.
I am indebted to J. Basedow and W. Voermans, C. Moll, N. Florijn, P. van Lochem, from whose articles I borrowed parts of the terminological categorisation of systematization in this book. See in detail J. Basedow, ‘The Challenge of Recodification Worldwide: Tranjurisdictional Codification’, Tulane Law Review, No. 82, 2009, pp. 975 et seqq. W. Voermans/C. Moll/N. Floijn/P. v. Lochem, ‘Codification and Consolidation in the European Union: A Means to Untie Red Tape’, Statute Law Review, 2008, No. 29, pp. 74 et seqq.
81.
The Statutes of the United States at Large are published annually, see J. Basedow, ‘The Challenge of Recodification Worldwide: Tranjurisdictional Codification’, Tulane Law Review, No. 83, 2009, Fn. 1.
82.
The Official Journal of the EU get published daily, see the website of the Publication Office of the EU, hyperlink “about us”, available at http://publications.europa.eu/about_us/index_en.htm.
83.
Accessable via eur-lex, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOIndex.do.
84.
See the website of the National Archives, available at http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/publications/statutes.html.
85.
H.R.J. Res. 10, 28th Cong. (1845), accessable via the website of the Library of Congress, available at http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=005/llsl005.db&recNum=836.
86.
See the website of the US Government Printing Office, available at http://www.gpo.gov/.
87.
See R. Posner, ‘In Memoriam: Bernard D. Meltzer (1914–2007)’, University of Chicago Law Review, No. 74, 2007, p. 437, although Posner rather subscribes these attributes to the work of a scholar, which therefore points more towards him describing codification.
88.
See for an illustrative description of the numerous consolidation techniques in Europe W. Voermans/C. Moll/N. Floijn/P. v. Lochem, ‘Codification and Consolidation in the European Union: A Means to Untie Red Tape’, Statute Law Review, 2008, No. 29, pp. 75 et seqq.
89.
See Conclusions of the European Council in Edinburgh in 11–12 December 1992, p. 37.
90.
See Conclusions of the European Council in Edinburgh in 11–12 December 1992, p. 37.
91.
A. v. Bogdandy, ‘Europäische Prinzipienlehre’ in: v. Bogdandy (ed.), Europäisches Verfassungsrecht (2003), p. 150, translation by author, in German original: “das Fokussieren der Aufmerksamkeit auf Strukturentscheidungen und einen darauf aufbauenden, die Identität der Disziplin bestimmenden Kernbestand rechtsdogmatischer Figuren, die einen gewissen Eigenstand gegenüber der nicht immer systematisch überzeugenden Rechtsetzungspraxis der Regierungskonferenzen aufweisen.”
92.
J. Basedow, ‘Das BGB im künftigen europäischen Privatrecht – Der hybride Kontext’, Archiv für die civilistische Praxis, No. 200, 2000, p. 453, translation by author, in German original: “Andererseits erlaubt aber die Verdichtung des europäischen Gemeinschaftsprivatrechts die Frage, ob nicht hinter der punktuellen Richtlinien Rechtsgrundsätze stehen, die sich für eine verbindende Sinngebung eignen und eine gewisse Verallgemeinerung gestatten”. In the same vein H.-W. Micklitz, ‘An Expanded and Systemized Community Consumer Law as Alternative or Complement?, European Business Law Review, No. 13, 2002, pp. 583 et seqq.
93.
H.-W. Micklitz, ‘Book Review Bettina Heiderhoff: Grundstrukturen des nationalen und europäischen Verbrauchervertragsrechts, insbesondere zur Reichweite europäischer Auslegung’ Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht, No. 72, 2008, p. 409: “[…] Verbraucherrecht [hat] europäisch […] einen Grad an Verdichtung erreicht […], der jedenfalls nach kontinentaleuropäischen Rechtsverständnis eine systematische Durchdringung verlangt.”
94.
See for details to this end W. Voermans/C. Moll/N. Floijn/P. v. Lochem, ‘Codification and Consolidation in the European Union: A Means to Untie Red Tape’, Statute Law Review, 2008, No. 29, pp. 74 et seqq.
95.
See Conclusions of the European Council in Edinburgh in 11–12 December 1992, p. 37 (fn. 1) and No. 1 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts, OJ C 102, 4.4.1996, p. 2–3. On the literal meaning of codification and other forms of definition see R. Zimmermann, ‘Codification: history and present significance of an idea’, European Review of Private Law, No. 3, 1995, pp. 96 et seqq.
96.
G. Bachmann, ‘Optionsmodelle im Privatrecht’, Juristenzeitung, 2008, pp. 14–15.
97.
H. Collins, The European Civil Code – The Way Forward, Cambridge, University Press, 2008, pp. 130–132; H.-W. Micklitz/S. Weatherill, ‘Federalism and Responsibility’, in: Micklitz/Roethe/Weatherill (eds.), Federalism and Responsibility – A Study on Product Safety Law and Practices in the European Community, London/Dodrecht/Boston, Graham&Trontman/Martinus Nijhoff, 1994, p. 8 claim that any legal system ‘contain an unavoidable, though in detail unseen, capacity for change’.
98.
M. Weber, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriß der Verstehenden Soziologie, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1922, p. 396, translation by author. For a larger context of the interpretation of Max Weber’s idea of systematization as a late product see W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidentalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 133.
99.
W. Teubner, Kodifikation und Rechtsreform in England, Berlin, Duncker & Humblot, 1974, p. 22–23; J. Basedow, ‘The Challenge of Recodification Worldwide: Tranjurisdictional Codification’, Tulane Law Review, No. 83, 2009, p. 975; A. v. Mehren, ‘Some Reflections on Codification and Case Law in the Twenty-First Century’, University of California Davis Law Review, No. 31, 1998, p. 668.
100.
B. Fauvarque-Cosson, ‘The Need for Codified Guiding Principles and Model Rules in European Contract Law’, in: Brownsword/Micklitz/Niglia/Weatherill (eds.), The Foundations of European Private Law, Oxford, Hart, 2011, p. 73, at p. 79 ‘A code is a coherent set of rules in a specific fields of the law.’
101.
G. Gilmore, ‘Legal Realism: Its Cause and Cure’, Yale Law Journal, No. 70, 1961, p. 1037, at p. 1043.
102.
J. Basedow, ‘The Challenge of Recodification Worldwide: Tranjurisdictional Codification’, Tulane Law Review, No. 83, 2009, p. 975.
103.
This is not to say that codification is hence free from political determinations. In fact, the impact of political determinations on codification has been subject to debate, see inter alia H. Schepel, ‘Professorenrecht? The Field of European Private Law’, in Jettinghoff/Schepel (eds.), In Lawyers’ Circles – Lawyers and European Legal Integration, The Hague, Elsevier Reed, 2004; id., ‘Professorenrecht? Le champ du droit européen’, Critique Internationale, No. 26, 2005a, pp. 147 et seqq.; J. Basedow, ‘The Challenge of Recodification Worldwide: Tranjurisdictional Codification’, Tulane Law Review, No. 83, 2009, p. 976, described political influence on codification as follows: “Codifiying the law is much more than picking fruit ripened on the trees of legal theory. The abrogation of the previous law, which is inherent to codification, always affects vested interests regardless of the consistent or inconsistent, uniform or nonuniform character of the previous rules.”
104.
See for an in-depth analysis of the involvement of law specialist in law making M. Weber, Economy and Society, Roth/Wittich (eds.), E. Fischoff et. al. (trans.), Vol. II, Berkeley (CA), University of California Press, 1978, pp. 775 et seqq. U. Schneider assigns legal consultance being an integral part of legal science. In his view, one of the main tasks of legal science is to build a bridge between society and politics, see U. Schneider, ‘Zur Verantwortung der Rechtswissenschaft’, Juristenzeitung, No. 33, 1987, pp. 699 et seqq.
105.
H. Schepel, ‘Professorenrecht? The Field of European Private Law’, in Jettinghoff/Schepel (eds.), In Lawyers' Circles – Lawyers and European Legal Integration, Elsevier Reed, 2004; id., ‘Professorenrecht? Le champ du droit européen’ (2005a), Critique Internationale, No. 26, pp. 147 et seqq.
106.
See for the difference between the periods H.-W. Micklitz, ‘Introduction – social justice and access justice in private law’, in: H.-W. Micklitz (eds.), The many concepts of social justice in European Private Law, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar 2011, p. 3, at pp. 8–15.
107.
The distinction between ‘law of the books’ and ‘law in action’ dates back to the 1910 article of R. Pound, ‘Law in the books and Law in action’, American Law Review, No. 44, 1910, pp. 12 et seqq. and was further developed especially at the University of Wisconsin-Madison Law School as the “Wisconsin idea”, see P. Carrington/ E. King, ‘Law and the Wisconsin Idea’, Journal of Legal Education, No. 47, 1997, pp. 297 et seqq.
108.
J. Wenzel, ‘Die Bindung des Richters an Gesetz und Recht’, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift, No. 61, 2008, p. 341, at p. 348, translation by KP.
109.
See for the EU legal system M. Maduro, ‘Interpreting European Law: Judicial Adjudication in a Context of Constitutional Pluralism’, European Journal of Legal Studies, No. 1 (2), p. 15. “The Court of Justice is one in a community of legal actors that ‘constructs’ the EU legal order. Such constitutional pluralism means that the development of EU law is dependent on a discursive process with other actors and that it is both shaped by that discourse and has to be shaped in the light of its likely ‘appropriation’ by those actors.” See inter alia the European Journal of Risk Regulation, which aims exactly at such a purpose, see A. Alemanno, ‘The Birth of the European Journal of Risk Regulation’, European Journal on Risk Regulation, No.1, 2010, p. 2: “It is time to transcend these partial and fragmented approaches and recognise – through a new journal – the emergence of a novel field of studies: the EU law of risk regulation. It is true that many different approaches to risk and its management have been developed over the past decades. What is lacking is a unified theory of European risk regulation. The main purpose of the Journal is therefore to promote and develop the study and understanding of European risk regulation. The EJRR offers a forum for informed and scholarly discussion on why, how and by whom new and old risks are managed and regulated across policy domains in Europe and beyond.”
110.
J. Esser, Grundsatz und Norm in der richterlichen Fortbildung des Privatrechts, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1964, p. 20.
111.
G. Roth highlights this evaluation as the main purpose of commentaries, see G. Roth, ‘§ 241 BGB, Methode der Rechtsschöpfung und –darstellung’, in: Münchener Kommentar zum BGB, 5th (old) ed., München, C.H. Beck, 2007a, para 36.
112.
J. Wenzel, ‘Die Bindung des Richters an Gesetz und Recht’, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift, 2008, p. 345 (348).
113.
R. Pound, Interpretation of Legal History, 1923, 1.
114.
See inter alia the ius commune series published at Hart, Oxford.
115.
See to this end L. Moreno, ‘Europeanisation, Mesogovernance and ‘Safety Nets”, European Journal of Political Research, No. 42, 2003, p. 272.
116.
M. Dawson, New Governance and the Proceduralisation of European Law: The Case of the Open Method of Coordination, Diss EUI Florence, 2009, pp. 47–48.
117.
G. Majone, ‘Foundations of Risk Regulation: Science, Decision-Making, Policy Learning and Institutional Reform’, European Journal of Risk Regulation, No. 1, 2010, pp. 5 et seqq.; K. Mathis, ‘Cultures of Administrative Law in Europe: From Weberian Bureaucracy to ‘Law and Economics’, in: Helleringer/Purnhagen (eds.), Towards a European Legal Culture, München/Oxford/Baden-Baden, 2013 (forthcoming).
118.
See C. Joerges/J. Neyer, ‘Politics, risk management, World Trade Organisation governance and the limits of legalisation’, Science and Public Policy, No. 30, 2003, pp. 219, at p. 221; G. Majone, ‘Foundations of Risk Regulation: Science, Decision-Making, Policy Learning and Institutional Reform’, European Journal of Risk Regulation, No. 1, 2010, pp. 5 et seqq.
119.
M. Dawson, New Governance and the Transformation of European Law, Cambridge, University Press, 2011, p. 176.
120.
R. Baldwin/J. Black, ‘Really Responsive Regulation’, Modern Law Review, No. 71, 2008, pp. 59, at p. 71.
121.
R. Baldwin/J. Black, ‘Really Responsive Regulation’, Modern Law Review, No. 71, 2008, pp. 59, at p. 71.
122.
R. Baldwin/J. Black, ‘Really Responsive Regulation’, Modern Law Review, No. 71, 2008, pp. 59, at p. 71.
123.
This analysis builds in part on my previous paper K. Purnhagen, ‘Competition of Agencies in European Pharmaceutical Law – Does It Exist, Is It Desirable and How to Handle It?’, European Journal of Risk Regulation, No. 1, 2010a, pp. 227 et seqq.
124.
See on the example of Max Weber L. Kaplan, ‘The Political – From Weimar to the Present’, in Kaplan/Koshar (eds.), The Weimar Moment, Plymouth, Lexington Books, 2012, pp. 185, at p. 186.
125.
See on civil law D. Caruso, ‘Private Law and State-Making in the Age of Globalization’, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, No. 38, 2006, pp. 24 et seqq.; H. Collins, The European Civil Code – The Way Forward, Cambridge, University Press, 2008, p. 130; J. Gordley, ‘Myths of the French Civil Code’, American Journal of Comparative Law, No. 42, 1994, pp. 459 et seqq.; C. Joerges, ‘The Science of Private Law and the Nation State’, in: F. Snyder (ed.), The Europeanisation of Law: The Legal Effects of European Integration, Oxford, Hart, 2000, p. 48; R. Schulze, ‘A Century of Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch: German Legal Uniformity and European Private Law’, Columbia Journal of European Law, 1999, p. 462; F. Wieacker, Privatrechtsgeschichte der Neuzeit unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der deutschen Entwicklung, Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1967, p. 443; See on the area of constitutional law C. v. Gerber, Grundzüge eines Systems des Deutschen Staatsrechts, Leipzig, Verlag von Bernhard Tauchnitz, 1865 see also O. Jounjan, ‘Carl Friedrich Gerber at la constitution d’une science du droit public allemand’, in: Beaud/Wachsmann (eds.), La science juridique française et la science juridique allemande de 1870 à 1918, Strasbourg: Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg, 1997.
126.
On dogmatism R. Stürner, ‘Das Zivilrecht der Moderne und die Bedeutung der Rechtsdogmatik’, Juristenzeitung, 2012, pp. 10 et seqq., at p. 17.
127.
S. Grundmann, ‘Das Thema Systembildung im Europäischen Privatrecht – Gesellschafts-, Arbeits- und Schuldvertragsrecht’, in: Grundmann (ed.), Systembildung und Systemlücken in Kerngebieten des Europäischen Privatrechts, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2000, p. 1, p. 2.
128.
H.-W. Micklitz, ‘Introduction – social justice and access justice in private law’, in: H.-W. Micklitz (eds.), The many concepts of social justice in European Private Law, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar 2011, p. 3, at pp. 15–16.
129.
R. Descartes, Discours de la méthode pour bien conduire sa raison et chercher la verité dans les sciences, Leiden, 1637.
130.
P. Lindseth, “Always Embedded’ Administration: The Historical Evolution of Administrative Justice as an Aspect of Modern Governance’, in Joerges/Stråt/Wagner (eds), The Economy as Polity – The Political Constitution of Contemporary Capitalism, London, UCL Press 2005, pp. 117 et seqq., at pp. 119 et seqq.
131.
See in a similar vein with regard to ‘social justice’ H.-W. Micklitz, ‘Introduction – social justice and access justice in private law’, in: H.-W. Micklitz (eds.), The many concepts of social justice in European Private Law, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar 2011, p. 3, at pp. 8–18.
132.
D. Caruso, ‘Private Law and State-Making in the Age of Globalization’, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, No. 38, 2006, p. 6, pp. 24 et seqq.; J. Gordley, ‘Myths of the French Civil Code’, American Journal of Comparative Law, No. 42, 1994, pp. 459 et seqq.
133.
J. Gordley, ‘Myths of the French Civil Code’, American Journal of Comparative Law, No. 42, 1994, pp. 459 et seqq.
134.
B. Markesinis/H. Unberath/A. Johnston, The German Law of Contract – A Comparative Treatise, 2nd ed., Oxford, Hart, 2006, at p. 7.
135.
B. Markesinis/H. Unberath/A. Johnston, The German Law of Contract – A Comparative Treatise, 2nd ed., Oxford, Hart, 2006, at p. 7.
136.
B. Markesinis/H. Unberath/A. Johnston, The German Law of Contract – A Comparative Treatise, 2nd ed., Oxford, Hart, 2006, at p. 7.
137.
See D. Kennedy, ‘The Disenchantment of Logically Formal Legal Rationality or Max Weber’s Sociology in the Genealogy of the Contemporary Mode of Western Legal Thought’, Hastings Law Journal, No. 55, 2004b, p. 1033, who referes to each of these development as an authority of source for systematization.
138.
See for an extensive and profound analysis D. Kelly, ‘Revisiting the Rights of Man: Georg Jellinek on Rights and the State’, Law and History Review, No. 22, 2004, paras 33 et seqq.
139.
E.-W. Böckenförde, Organ, Organismus, Organisation, politischer Körper, Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe, Stuttgart, Klett-Cotta, 1982, 4:561.
140.
See on this idea B. Stollberg-Rillinger, Der Staat als Maschine, Berlin, Duncker & Humblot, 1986.
141.
A. Müller, Die Elemente der Staatskunst, Berlin, 1936.
142.
D. Kelly, ‘Revisiting the Rights of Man: Georg Jellinek on Rights and the State’, Law and History Review, No. 22, 2004, para 48.
143.
Even today, Jellinek’s ‘three elements theory’, which is based on the concept of Verbandseinheit, is prominently used to define the term ‘state’ in international public law, see inter alia Art. 1 of the Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933 (Montevideo Convention): ‘The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.’; Verwaltungsgericht Köln, Deutsche Verwaltungblätter, 1978, Sealand, pp. 510–512.
144.
H.-W. Micklitz, ‘Introduction – social justice and access justice in private law’, in: H.-W. Micklitz (eds.), The many concepts of social justice in European Private Law, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar 2011, p. 3, at pp. 14–15.
145.
See R. Zimmermann, ‘Codification: history and present significance of an idea’, European Review of Private Law, No. 3, 1995, pp. 101 et seqq.
146.
C. v. Gerber, Grundzüge eines Systems des Deutschen Staatsrechts, Leipzig, Verlag von Bernhard Tauchnitz, 1865 see also O. Jounjan, ‘Carl Friedrich Gerber at la constitution d’une science du droit public allemand’, in: Beaud/Wachsmann (eds.), La science juridique française et la science juridique allemande de 1870 à 1918, Strasbourg, Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg, 1997.
147.
Deutsches Verwaltungsrecht (2 volumes), 3rd ed. 1924.
148.
Verwaltungslehre (8 volumes), 1866–1884.
149.
Grundzüge des Verwaltungs-Rechts und -Rechtsverfahrens, 1857.
150.
See for an overview C. Bollen/G.-R. de Groot, ‘The Sources and Backgrounds of European Legal Systems’, in: Hartkamp/Hesselink (eds.), Towards a European Civil Code, Aalphen an den Rijn, Kluwer Law International, 1994, pp. 97 et seqq.
151.
See R. Zimmermann, ‘Codification: history and present significance of an idea’, European Review of Private Law, No. 3, 1995, p. 102.
152.
See R. Zimmermann, ‘Codification: history and present significance of an idea’, European Review of Private Law, No. 3, 1995, p. 102.
153.
See inter alia R. van Caenegem, European Law in the Past and Future, Cambridge, University Press, 2002, pp. 90 et seqq.; B. Markesinis/H. Unberath/A. Johnston, The German Law of Contract – A Comparative Treatise, 2nd ed., Oxford, Hart, 2006, at. 8; J. Schapp, ‘Probleme einer europäischen Juristenausbildung’, in: Schapp (ed.), Methodenlehre und System des Rechts, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2009b, p. 227 et seqq.
154.
H.-W. Micklitz, ‘Introduction – social justice and access justice in private law’, in: H.-W. Micklitz (eds.), The many concepts of social justice in European Private Law, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar 2011, p. 3, at pp. 18–19.
155.
See on this interpretation also C. Grechenig/M. Gelter, ‘The Transatlantic Divergence in Legal Thought: American Law and Economics vs. German Doctrinalism’, Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, No. 31, 2008, p. 343.
156.
R. van Caenegem, European Law in the Past and Future, Cambridge, University Press, 2002, p. 91.
157.
H.-W. Micklitz, ‘Introduction – social justice and access justice in private law’, in: H.-W. Micklitz (eds.), The many concepts of social justice in European Private Law, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar 2011, p. 3, at p. 19.
158.
D. Kennedy, ‘The Disenchantment of Logically Formal Legal Rationality or Max Weber’s Sociology in the Genealogy of the Contemporary Mode of Western Legal Thought’, Hastings Law Journal, No. 55, 2004b, p. 1033.
159.
D. Kennedy, ‘The Disenchantment of Logically Formal Legal Rationality or Max Weber’s Sociology in the Genealogy of the Contemporary Mode of Western Legal Thought’, Hastings Law Journal, No. 55, 2004b, p. 1033.
160.
See R. Kiesow, ‘Rechtswissenschaft – was ist das?’, Juristenzeitung, 2010, p. 589, who highlights that ‘legal science’ after the introduction of the BGB lived on via the subsequent interpretation of the code.
161.
See D.-J. Mann, ‘(Legal) Culture in the European Union and the United States - A Comparative Political Science Perspective’, in: Helleringer/Purnhagen, Towards a European Legal Culture, München/Oxford/Baden-Baden, C.H. Beck, Hart, Nomos, forthcoming 2013; The first draft of the German Civil Code in 1888 was criticised as ‘little Windscheid’ as it has been perceived as being too professorial, see v. Caenegem, European Law in the Past and the Future, Cambridge, University Press, 2002, p. 99.
162.
See among the vast amount of literature inter alia D. Caruso, ‘Private Law and State-Making in the Age of Globalization’, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, No. 38, 2006, p. 4.
163.
See for an extensive and profound analysis D. Kelly, ‘Revisiting the Rights of Man: Georg Jellinek on Rights and the State’, Law and History Review, No. 22, 2004, paras 33 et seqq.
164.
In this respect inter alia T. Lock, ‘Why the European Union is Not a State – Some Critical Remarks’, European Constitutional Law Review, No. 5, 2009, pp. 407 et seqq.; see for an overview H.-W. Micklitz/S. Weatherill, ‘Federalism and Responsibility’, in: Micklitz/Roethe/Weatherill (eds.), Federalism and Responsibility – A Study on Product Safety Law and Practices in the European Community, London/Dordrecht/Boston, Graham&Trontman/Martinus Nijhoff, 1994, p. 13, who emphasise that the range of arguments in fact reach from ‘no state’ to a ‘Community state’.
165.
Bundesverfassungsgericht 2 BvR 2134, 2159/92, Decision of 12 October 1993, Maastricht, BVerfGE 89, 155, para 90.
166.
Bundesverfassungsgericht, 2 BvE 2/08, Decision of 30 June 2009, Lissabon, BVerfGE 123, 267, para 229; English translation available at http://www.bverfg.de/entscheidungen/es20090630_2bve000208en.html, see for a critical assessment on the Lisbon-judgment inter alia J. Ziller, ‘Solange III (or the Bundesverfassungsgericht’s‚ Europe Friendlyness) On the Decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court Over the Ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon’, Rivista Italiana di Diritto Pubblico Comunitario, 2009 pp. 973 et seqq.
167.
Bundesverfassungsgericht 2 BvR 2134, 2159/92, Decision of 12 October 1993, Maastricht, BVerfGE 89, 155.
168.
See for a practical impact of the ‘three elements theory’ inter alia Art. 1 of the Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933 (Montevideo Convention); T. Lock, ‘Why the European Union is Not a State – Some Critical Remarks’, European Constitutional Law Review, No. 5, 2009, pp. 407 et seqq. also analyzes the state character of the EU using Jellinek’s three-elements theory.
169.
See for an in-depth analysis J. Weiler, ‘Der Staat “über alles”. Demos, Telos und die Maastricht-Entscheidung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts’, Jahrbuch des Öffentlichen Rechts, No. 44, 1996, pp. 91 et seqq.
170.
N. Walker, ‘The Idea of Constitutional Pluralism’, The Modern Law Review, No. 65, 2002, p. 317, at p. 321.
171.
See inter alia T. Lock, ‘Why the European Union is Not a State – Some Critical Remarks’, European Constitutional Law Review, No. 5, 2009, pp. 407 et seqq.
172.
BVerfGE 89, 155, para 90. The terminology relies on a highly contested concept developed by Paul Kirchhof, who was able to promote this concept during his time as judge of the Bundesverfassungsgericht in spite of the heavy criticism in German and international academia see J. Weiler, ‘Der Staat “über alles”. Demos, Telos und die Maastricht-Entscheidung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts’, Jahrbuch des Öffentlichen Rechts, No. 44, 1996, pp. 91 et seqq.; M. Ruffert, ‘An den Grenzen des Integrationsverfassungsrechts: Das Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts zum Vertrag von Lissabon’, Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt, No. 124, 2009, p. 1198. See for a highly valueable response to Kirchhof’s view C. Tomuschat, ‘Wer hat höhere Hoheitsgewalt?’, Humbold Forum Recht, Beitrag 8, 1997, para 3: “Hat aber einmal die Bundesrepublik Deutschland einer Übertragung von Hoheitsgewalt (…) zugestimmt, so kann sie diese Bindung nicht mehr einseitig von sich abschütteln.”
173.
J. Weiler, ‘Der Staat “über alles”. Demos, Telos und die Maastricht-Entscheidung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts’, Jahrbuch des Öffentlichen Rechts, No. 44, 1996, pp. 91 et seqq.
174.
BVerfG, 2 BvE 2/08 of 30.6.2009, para 229; available at BVerfGE 123, 267; English translation available at http://www.bverfg.de/entscheidungen/es20090630_2bve000208en.html.
175.
J. Shaw/A. Wiener, ‘The Paradox of the European Polity’, in: Green Cowles/Smith (eds.), The State of the European Union 5: Risks, Reform, Resistance and Revival, Oxford, University Press, 2000, p. 65.
176.
G. Majone, ‘The Rise of the Regulatory State in Europe’, West European Politics 3, No. 17, 1994; as well as id. (ed.), Regulating Europe, London, 1996.
177.
H. Hofmann/A. Türk, ‘The Development of Integrated Administration in the EU and its Consequences’, European Law Journal, No. 13, 2007, p. 253, at p. 264.
178.
See critical in this respect esp. A.-M. Slaughter, ‘Abram Chayes: A Tribute’, Harvard Law Review, No. 114, 2001, p. 682, at p. 684.
179.
See except of many J. Weiler, ‘Der Staat “über alles”. Demos, Telos und die Maastricht-Entscheidung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts’, Jahrbuch des Öffentlichen Rechts, No. 44, 1996, pp. 91 et seqq.
180.
Some authors such as T. Lock, ‘Why the European Union is Not a State – Some Critical Remarks’, European Constitutional Law Review, No. 5, 2009, p. 418 highlight that the TEU refers to the EU’s subjects after Lisbon more often as ‘citizens’ as the previous treaties did. In their view, this fact should be interpreted as moving towards one people of Europe. They, however, disregard first the fact that ‘citizen’ as a technical term refers to political and social rights, which should be clearly distinguished from ‘people’ that describes a nation based on common identities and values. This argument, however, is not a strong one as citizenship is increasingly subject to a material interpretation, see e.g. F. Trentmann, ‘Citizenship and Consumption’, Journal of Consumer Culture, No. 7, 2007, pp. 147 et seqq.; However, Lock’s argument is problematic as second the ‘citizen’ language is used seldomly in secondary law, and third the fact that European citizenship is accessory to Member State nationality, , see in detail the analysis of D.-J Mann/K. Purnhagen, ‘The Nature of Union Citizenship Between Autonomy and Dependency on (Member) State Citizenship – A Comparative Analysis of the Rottmann Ruling, or: How to Avoid a European Dred Scott Decision?, Wisconsin International Law Journal, No. 29, 2011, pp. 484 et seqq.
181.
J. Bengoetxea, Legal System as a Regulative Ideal, in: Koch/Neumann (eds.), Praktische Vernunft und Rechtsanwendung, ARSP-Beiheft 53, 1994, p. 65, at 71.
182.
S. Grundmann, ‘Das Thema Systembildung im Europäischen Privatrecht – Gesellschafts-, Arbeits- und Schuldvertragsrecht’, in: Grundmann (ed.), Systembildung und Systemlücken in Kerngebieten des Europäischen Privatrechts, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2000, p. 1, p. 2.
183.
See for an overview of the questions related to these aspects A. Benz/C. Harlow/Y. Papadopoulos, ‘Introduction’, European Law Journal, No. 13, 2007, pp. 441 et seqq.
184.
See among the vast amount of literature inter alia D. Caruso, ‘Private Law and State-Making in the Age of Globalization’, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, No. 38, 2006, p. 4.
185.
Preamble of the Treaty of the European Coal and Steel Community.
186.
See for the inner state dimension also Art. 3 (1) EU “The Union’s aim is to promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples.” On the concept of inner- and outer state dimensions D. Patterson/A. Afilalo, The new global trading order: the evolving state and the future of trade, Cambridge, University Press, 2010, pp. 3 et seqq.
187.
B. de Witte, ‘Non-market Values in Internal Market Legislation’, in: N. Shuibhne (ed.), Regulating the Internal Market, 2006, p. 61, at p. 75.
188.
See to this end also L. Moreno, ‘Europeanisation, Mesogovernance and ‘Safety Nets”, European Journal of Political Research, No. 42, 2003, p. 272.
189.
P. Bobbitt, The Shield of Achilles – War, Peace, and the Course of History, New York, Knopf, 2002, p. 215.
190.
P. Bobbitt, The Shield of Achilles – War, Peace, and the Course of History, New York, Knopf, 2002, p. 215, see also for an illustration of the different tasks of statehood id., p. 347, plate IV.
191.
Case C-438/05, Judgment of 11 December 2007, International Transport Workers’ Federation and Finnish Seamen’s Union v Viking Line ABP and OÜ Viking Line Eesti [2007] ECR I-10779.
192.
Case C-341/05, Judgment of 18 December 2007, Laval un Partneri Ltd v Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundet and Others [2007] ECR I-11767.
193.
Case C-555/07, Judgment of 19 January 2010, Kücükdeveci [2010] ECR I-365.
194.
Case C-236/09, Judgment of 1 March 2011, Association belge des Consommateurs Test-Achats ASBL, Yann van Vugt, Charles Basselier v. Conseil des ministres [2011], ECR-0000,
195.
See in this respect H.-W. Micklitz, ‘Judicial Activism of the European Court of Justice and the Development of the European Social Model in Anti-Discrimination and Consumer Law’, in: Neergaard/Nielsen/Roseberry (eds.), The Role of Courts in Developing a European Social Model – Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives, DJØF Publishing, 2010a, pp. 45 et seqq.
196.
See to this end the first chapter of this thesis.
197.
See Case C-341/05, Judgment of 18 December 2007, Laval un Partneri Ltd v Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundet and Others [2007] ECR I-11767, para. 105; Case C-438/05, Judgment of 11 December 2007, International Transport Workers’ Federation and Finnish Seamen’s Union v Viking Line ABP and OÜ Viking Line Eesti [2007] ECR I-10779, para. 79.
198.
D. Caruso has already made this claim with regards to private law and creation of supranational states, see D. Caruso, ‘Private Law and State-Making in the Age of Globalization’, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, No. 38, 2006, p. 6. H.-W. Micklitz identified systematization as contributor to the development of regulatory private law in the EU, see H.-W. Micklitz, ‘The Visible Hand of European Regulatory Private Law – The Transformation of European Private Law from Autonomy to Functionalism in Competition and Regulation’, in: Eckehout/Trimidas (eds.), Yearbook of European Law, No. 28, 2009; while I. Pernice has identified that systematization might contribute to the building of regulatory administrative law, see I. Pernice, ‘Soll das Recht der Regulierungsverwaltung übergreifend geregelt werden? Europarechtliche Aspekte’, in: Ständige Desputation des Deutschen Juristentages (ed.), Verhandlungen des sechsundsechzigsten Deutschen Juristentages, München, C.H. Beck, 2006, p. O 87.
199.
C. Joerges, ‘The Europeanisation of European Private Law as a Rationalisation Process and a Contest of Disciplines – an Analysis of the Directive on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts’, European Review of Private Law, 1995, p. 179 et seqq.; H.-W. Micklitz, ‘Some Considerations on Cassis de Dijon and the Control of Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts’, in: Boele-Woelki/Grosheide (eds.), The Future of European Contract Law: Essays in Honour of Ewoud Hondius, 2007, New York, Wolters Kluwer Aspen Publishing, p. 387.
200.
A. v. Bogdandy, ‘Founding Principles’, in: v. Bogdandy/Bast (eds.), Principles of European Constitutional Law, Oxford/München/Baden-Baden, Hart/C.H. Beck/Nomos, 2nd ed., 2010, pp. 11, at p. 16.
201.
R. Alexy/A. Peczenik, ‘The Concept of Coherence and its Significance for Discursive Rationality’, Ratio Iuris, No. 3, 1990, p. 130.
202.
C. Hood/H. Rothstein/R. Baldwin, The Government of Risk, Oxford, University Press, 2001, pp. 26–27 with further references.
203.
See for detail the third chapter of this piece.
204.
C-470/03, Judgment of the Court of 17 April 2007, AGM-COS.Met v Suomen valito v. Tanno Lehtinen [2007], ECR I-2749; comment N. Reich, ‘AGM-COS.Met or: Who is Protected by Safety Regulation?’, European Law Review, No. 33, 2008, p. 85.
205.
See for a general critique on such rationalizing arguments in risk regulation G. Majone, ‘Foundations of Risk Regulation: Science, Decision-Making, Policy Learning and Institutional Reform’, European Journal of Risk Regulation, No. 1, 2010, p. 5, at pp. 8 et seqq.
206.
Critical in this respect C. Joerges/J. Neyer, ‘Politics, risk management, World Trade Organisation governance and the limits of legalisation’, Science and Public Policy, No. 30, 2003, pp. 220 et seqq.
207.
See for an overview of the debate on animal cloning and the respective arguments M. Weimer, ‘The Regulatory Challenge of Animal Cloning for Food’, European Journal of Risk Regulation, No. 1, 2010, pp. 34 et seqq.
208.
L. Moreno, ‘Europeanisation, Mesogovernance and ‘Safety Nets”, European Journal of Political Research, No. 42, 2003, p. 272.
209.
L. Moreno, ‘Europeanisation, Mesogovernance and ‘Safety Nets”, European Journal of Political Research, No. 42, 2003, p. 272.
210.
W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidetalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 143.
211.
W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidetalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 143.
212.
W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidetalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 143.
213.
W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidetalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 146.
214.
W. Schluchter, Die Entwicklung des Okzidetalen Rationalismus, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1979, p. 146.
215.
See O. Kahn-Freund, ‘Common Law and Civil Law: Imaginary and Real Obstacles to Assimilation’, in: Cappelletti (ed.), New Perspectives for a Common Law of Europe/Nouvelles Perspecitives d’un droit commun de l’Eruope, Leyden/Brussels/Stuttgart/Florence, Sijthoff/Bruylant/Klett-Cotta/Le Monnier, 1978, p. 141.
216.
L. Friedman/G. Teubner, ‘Legal Education and Legal Integration’, in: Cappelletti/Seccombe/Weiler (eds.), Integration Through Law – Europe an the Federal Experience, Vol. 1, Book 3, Berlin/New York, Walter de Gruyter, 1986, p. 377.
217.
A. v. Bogdandy, ‘Founding Principles’, in: v. Bogdandy/Bast (eds.), Principles of European Constitutional Law, Oxford/München/Baden-Baden, Hart/C.H. Beck/Nomos, 2nd ed., 2010, pp. 11, at p. 16.
218.
A. v. Bogdandy, ‘Founding Principles’, in: v. Bogdandy/Bast (eds.), Principles of European Constitutional Law, Oxford/München/Baden-Baden, Hart/C.H. Beck/Nomos, 2nd ed., 2010, pp. 11, at p. 16.
219.
See W. Molle, The Economics of European Integration, 5th ed., Farnham, Ashgate 2006, esp. pp. 35–36 and 67.
220.
T. Trimidas, The General Principles of EU Law, Oxford, University Press, 2nd ed., 2006.
221.
J.-U. Franck/K. Purnhagen, ‘Homo Economicus, Behavioural Sciences, and Economic Regulation: On the Concept of Man in Internal Market Regulation and its Normative Basis’, in: Mathis (ed.), Law and Economics in Europe: Foundations and Applications, Dordrecht, Springer 2013 (forthcoming).
222.
E. Petersmann, ‘Constitutional Economics, Human Rights and the WTO’ Aussenwirtschaft, No. 58, 2003, p. 49, at p. 56.
223.
K. Purnhagen, ‘The Architecture of Post-National European Contract Law from a Phenomenological Perspective – A Question of Institutions’, Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht – The Rabel Journal of Comparative and International Private Law, forthcoming 2013b.
224.
K. Purnhagen, ‘The Architecture of Post-National European Contract Law from a Phenomenological Perspective – A Question of Institutions’, Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht – The Rabel Journal of Comparative and International Private Law, forthcoming 2013b.
225.
It is therefore no surprise that US importers demand further standardisation of EU product safety law, see D. Hanson, CE Marking, Product Standards and World Trade, Cheltenham, Northampton (MA), Edward Elgar, 2005, pp. 3.
226.
Case C-112/00, Judgment of the Court of 12 June 2003, Eugen Schmidberger, Internationale Transporte und Planzüge v. Republik Österreich [2003] ECR I-5659, para. 81.
227.
I have written elsewhere on the justification of this argument, see K. Purnhagen, ‘The MRIC Working Paper No. 15 Law and Economics of the Precautionary Principle in Artegodan and Its Impact on EU Internal Market Regulation’, fn. 30.
228.
J. Bengoetxea, Legal System as a Regulative Ideal, in: Koch/ Neumann (eds.), Praktische Vernunft und Rechtsanwendung, ARSP-Beiheft 53, 1994, p. 65, at 71.
229.
M. Adenas/D. Fairgrierve, ‘There is a World Out Elsewhere’ – Lord Bingham and Comparative Law’, in: Adenas/Fairgrieve (eds.), Tom Bingham and the Transformation of the Law: A Liber Amicorum, Oxford, University Press, 2009, 856.
230.
M. Dyson, ‘Divide and Conquer: Setting the Boundaries of Comparative Law’, in: Helleringer/Purnhagen (eds.), Towards a European Legal Culture, München/Oxford/Baden-Baden, Beck/ Hart/Nomos, forthcoming 2013, describes them as ‘Legal Domains’.
231.
M. Adenas/D. Fairgrierve, ‘There is a World Out Elsewhere’ – Lord Bingham and Comparative Law’, in: Adenas/Fairgrieve (eds.), Tom Bingham and the Transformation of the Law: A Liber Amicorum, Oxford, University Press, 2009, 856.
232.
J. Bengoetxea, ‘Legal System as a Regulative Ideal’, in: Koch/ Neumann (eds.), Praktische Vernunft und Rechtsanwendung, ARSP-Beiheft 53, 1994, p. 65, at 69.
233.
S. Grundmann, ‘Das Thema Systembildung im Europäischen Privatrecht – Gesellschafts-, Arbeits- und Schuldvertragsrecht’, in: Grundmann (ed.), Systembildung und Systemlücken in Kerngebieten des Europäischen Privatrechts, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2000, p. 1, p. 3.
234.
S. Grundmann, ‘Das Thema Systembildung im Europäischen Privatrecht – Gesellschafts-, Arbeits- und Schuldvertragsrecht’, in: Grundmann (ed.), Systembildung und Systemlücken in Kerngebieten des Europäischen Privatrechts, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2000, p. 1, p. 10.
235.
T. Tröger, ‘Zum Systemdenken im europäischen Schuldvertragsrecht – Probleme der Rechtsangleichung durch Richtlinien am Beispiel der Verbrauchsgüterkaufrichtlinie’, Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht, No. 11, 2003, 525, at p. 539; N. Walker talks about a “meta language”, see N. Walker, ‘The Idea of Constitutional Pluralism’, Modern Law Review, No. 65, 2002, pp. 317–359.
236.
S. Grundmann, ‘Europäisches Schuldvertragsrecht’, Zeitschrift für Unternehmens- und Gesellschaftsrecht 1999, Einleitung, para 4.
237.
Rightly so A. v. Bogdandy, ‘Founding Principles’, in: v. Bogdandy/Bast (eds.), Principles of European Constitutional Law, Oxford/München/Baden-Baden, Hart/C.H. Beck/Nomos, 2nd ed., 2010, pp. 11, at p. 16.
238.
In this sense correctly also T. Tröger, ‘Zum Systemdenken im europäischen Schuldvertragsrecht – Probleme der Rechtsangleichung durch Richtlinien am Beispiel der Verbrauchsgüterkaufrichtlinie’, Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht, No. 11, 2003, 525, at p. 539.
239.
S. Grundmann, ‘Das Thema Systembildung im Europäischen Privatrecht – Gesellschafts-, Arbeits- und Schuldvertragsrecht’, in: Grundmann (ed.), Systembildung und Systemlücken in Kerngebieten des Europäischen Privatrechts, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2000, p. 1, p. 10.
240.
O. Holmes, ‘Book Notice’, American Law Review, No. 14, 1880, 233, at p. 234.
241.
M. Dawson, New Governance and the Transformation of European Law, Cambridge, University Press, 2011, p. 89.
242.
See on the need to group individuals for the purpose of efficient regulation on the example of the determination of the “duty of care” S. Shavell, Economic Analysis of Accident Law, Cambridge (MA), Harvard University Press, 1987, p. 74.
243.
See to this end the most influential study led by M. Cappelletti/M. Seccombe/J. Weiler (eds.), Integration Through Law – Europe and the Federal Experience, Berlin/New York, Walter de Gruyter, 1986.
244.
N. Walker, ‘Constitutionalism and New Governance in the European Union: Rethinking the Boundaries’, in: de Búrca/Scott (eds.), Law and New Governance in the EU and US, Oxford, Hart, 2006.
245.
M. Dawson, New Governance and the Transformation of European Law, Cambridge, University Press, 2011, p. 83.
246.
G. Sydow, Verwaltungskooperation in der Europäischen Union, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2004, p. 118: “Die Vorwürfe der Unübersichtlichkeit und inhaltlichen Disparität, wenn nicht des rechtlichen Chaos, die gegen das europäische Unionsrecht im Hinblick auf seine Rechtsquellen, Handlungsformen oder die bloße Anzahl der Sekundärrechtsakte immer wieder erhoben wird, zwingen nicht zu einer vorschnellen Aufgabe des Systemgedankens, sondern fordern ihn heraus.”
247.
T. Ackermann, Der Schutz des negativen Interesses, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2007, p. 11; K. Schmidt, ‘Zivilistische Rechtsfiguren zwischen Rechtsdogmatik und Rechtspolitik. Exemplarisches zum Programm der Ringvorlesung, in: K. Schmidt (ed.), Rechtsdogmatik und Rechtspolitik: Hamburger Ringvorlesung, Berlin, 1990, S. 9, 15. ff.; A. v. Bogdandy, ‘Founding Principles’, in: v. Bogdandy/Bast (eds.), Principles of European Constitutional Law, Oxford/München/Baden-Baden, Hart/C.H. Beck/Nomos, 2nd ed., 2010, pp. 11, at p. 18.
248.
A. v. Bogdandy, ‘Founding Principles’, in: v. Bogdandy/Bast (eds.), Principles of European Constitutional Law, Oxford/München/Baden-Baden, Hart/C.H. Beck/Nomos, 2nd ed., 2010, pp. 11, at p. 17.
249.
G. Schuppert, G./C. Bumke, Die Konstitutionalisierung der Rechtsordnung, Baden-Baden, Nomos, 2000, p. 40.
250.
T. Ackermann correctly calls this an “imperative of scientific honesty”(translation KP), see T. Ackermann, Der Schutz des negative Interesses, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2007, p. 9.
251.
T. Tröger, ‘Zum Systemdenken im europäischen Schuldvertragsrecht – Probleme der Rechtsangleichung durch Richtlinien am Beispiel der Verbrauchsgüterkaufrichtlinie’, Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht, No. 11, 2003, 525, at p. 539.
252.
See to this end also R. Zimmermann, ‘Savigny’s Legacy, Comparative Law, and the Emergence of a European Legal Science’, Law Quarterly Review, No. 112, 1996, pp. 567 et seqq.
253.
J. Weiler/J. Trachtman, ‘European Constitutionalism and its Discontents’, Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, No. 17, 1997, p. 354 describe EU law as being “not a different species of law, but is a mutation of the same species”.

References

Ackermann, Thomas. 2007. Der Schutz des negativen Interesses. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Google Scholar
Ackermann, Thomas. 2013. Public supply of optional standardized consumer contracts: A rationale for the common European sales law? Common Market Law Review 50 (forthcoming).
Google Scholar
Adenas, Mads, and Duncan Fairgrierve. 2009. ‘There is a World Out Elsewhere’ – Lord Bingham and comparative law. In Tom Bingham and the transformation of the law: A Liber Amicorum, ed. Mads Adenas and Duncan Fairgrierve, 856 et seqq. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Alemanno, Alberto. 2010. The birth of the European journal of risk regulation. European Journal of Risk Regulation 1: 2 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Alexy, Robert, and Aleksander Peczenik. 1990. The concept of coherence and its significance for discursive rationality. Ratio Juris 3: 130 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Bachmann, Gregor. 2008. Optionsmodelle im Privatrecht. Juristenzeitung 63: 11 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Baldwin, Robert, and Julia Black. 2008. Really responsive regulation. Modern Law Review 71: 59 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Barak, Aharon. 2006. The judge in a democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar
Basedow, Jürgen. 2009. The challenge of recodification worldwide: Transjurisdictional codification. Tulane Law Review 83: 974 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Bell, John. 2001. French legal cultures. London: Butterworths.
Google Scholar
Bengoetxea, Joxerramon. 1994. Legal system as a regulative ideal. In Praktische Vernunft und Rechtsanwendung, ARSP-Beiheft, vol. 53, eds. Hans-Joachim Koch and Ulfried Neumann, 65 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Benz, Arthur, Carol Harlow, and Yannis Papadopoulos. 2007. Introduction. European Law Journal 13: 441 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Berman, Harold. 1983. Law and revolution – The formation of the western legal tradition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar
Berman, Harold. 2003. Law and revolution II. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar
Bertea, Stefano. 2005. The arguments from coherence: Analysis and evaluation. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 25: 369 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Betlem, Gerrit. 2002. The doctrine of consistent interpretation – Managing legal uncertainty. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 22: 397 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Bobbitt, Philipp. 2002. The shield of Achilles: War, peace, and the course of history. New York: Knopf.
Google Scholar
Böckenförde, Ernst-W. 1982. Organ, Organismus, Organisation, politischer Körper, Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.
Google Scholar
Bollen, Carlos, and Gerard-R de Groot. 1994. The sources and backgrounds of European legal systems. In Towards a European civil code, ed. Hartkamp and Hesselink, 97 et seqq. Den Haag: Kluwer Law International.
Google Scholar
Callies, Christian, and Peer Zumbansen. 2010. Rough consensus and running code. Oxford: Hart.
Google Scholar
Cappelletti, Mauro, Monica Seccombe, and Joseph Weiler (eds.). 1986. Integration through law – Europe and the federal experience. Berlin/New York: Welter de Gruyter.
Google Scholar
Carrington, Paul, and Erika King. 1997. Law and the Wisconsin idea. Journal of Legal Education 47: 297 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Caruso, Daniela. 2006. Private law and state-making in the age of globalization. New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 38: 1 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Collins, Hugh. 2005. Regulating contracts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Collins, Hugh. 2008. The European civil code – The way forward. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Dawson, John. 1986. Oracles of the law. Ann Arbor: William S Hein & Co.
Google Scholar
Dawson, Mark. 2009. New governance and the proceduralisation of European Law: The case of the open method of coordination. Diss European University Institute, Florence.
Google Scholar
Dawson, Mark. 2011. New governance and the transformation of European Law: Coordinating EU social law and policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
de Witte, Bruno. 2006. Non-market values in internal market legislation. In Regulating the internal market, ed. Shuibhne, 61 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Descartes, René. 1637. Discours de la méthode pour bien conduire sa raison et chercher la verité dans les sciences. Leiden.
Google Scholar
Dyson, Matthew. 2013. Divide and conquer: Setting the boundaries of comparative law. In Towards a European legal culture, eds. Helleringer and Purnhagen. München/Oxford/Baden-Baden: Beck/Hart/Nomos (forthcoming).
Google Scholar
Esser, Josef. 1964. Grundsatz und Norm in der richterlichen Fortbildung des Privatrechts. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Google Scholar
Fauvarque-Cosson, Bénédicte. 2011. The need for codified guiding principles and model rules in European contract law. In The foundations of European private law, ed. Brownsword, Micklitz, Niglia, and Weatherill, 73 et seqq. Oxford: Hart.
Google Scholar
Franck, Jens-U., and Kai Purnhagen. 2013. Homo economicus, behavioural sciences, and economic regulation: On the concept of man in internal market regulation and its normative basis. In Foundations of law and economics in Europe, ed. Klaus Mathis. New York: Springer (forthcoming).
Google Scholar
Friedman, Lawrence, and Gunter Teubner. 1986. Legal education and legal integration. In Integration through law – Europe and the federal experience, Cappelletti, Seccombe, and Weiler eds., vol. 1, Book 3, 370 et seqq. Berlin/New York: Welter de Gruyter.
Google Scholar
Fuller, Lon. 1968. Anatomy of the law. Frederick A. Praeger/The Pall Mall Press: New York/London.
Google Scholar
Gilmore, Grant. 1961. Legal realism: Its cause and cure. Yale Law Journal 70: 1037 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Gordley, James. 1994. Myths of the French civil code. American Journal of Comparative Law 42: 459 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Grechenig, Kristoffel, and Martin Gelter. 2008. The transatlantic divergence in legal thought: American law and economics vs. German doctrinalism. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review 31: 295 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Grundmann, Stefan. 1999. Europäisches Schuldvertragsrecht. Zeitschrift für Unternehmens- und Gesellschaftsrecht.
Google Scholar
Grundmann, Stefan. 2000. Das Thema Systembildung im Europäischen Privatrecht – Gesellschafts-, Arbeits- und Schuldvertragsrecht. In Systembildung und Systemlücken in Kerngebieten des Europäischen Privatrechts, ed. Stefan Grundmann, 1 et seqq. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Google Scholar
Hanson, David. 2005. CE marking, product standards and world trade. Cheltenham et al.: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
Google Scholar
Hofmann, Herwig, and Andreas Türk. 2007. The development of integrated administration in the EU and its consequences. European Law Journal 13: 253 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Holmes, Oliver. 1880. Book notice. American Law Review 14: 233 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Holmes, Oliver. 1881. The common law. Boston: Little, Brown.
Google Scholar
Hood, Christopher, Henry Rothstein, and Robert Baldwin. 2001. The government of risk. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Joerges, Christian. 1995. The Europeanisation of private law as a retaionalisation process and as a contest of disciplines – An analysis of the directive on unfair terms in consumer contracts. European Review of Private Law 3: 175 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Joerges, Christian. 2000. The science of private law and the nation state. In The Europeanisation of law: The legal effects of European integration, ed. F. Snyder, 48 et seqq. Oxford: Hart.
Google Scholar
Joerges, Christian, and Jürgen Neyer. 2003. Politics, risk management, World Trade Organisation governance and the limits of legalisation. Science and Public Policy 30: 219 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Jounjan, Olivier. 1997. Carl Friedrich Gerber at la constitution d’une science du droit public allemand. In La science juridique française et la science juridique allemande de 1870 à 1918, ed. Beaud and Wachsmann. Strasbourg: Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg.
Google Scholar
Kahn-Freund, Ono. 1978. Common law and civil law: Imaginary and real obstacles to assimilation. In New perspectives for a common law of Europe/Nouvelles Perspecitives d’un droit commun de l’Eruope, ed. Cappelletti, 137 et seqq. Leyden/Brussels/Stuttgart/Florence: Sijthoff/Bruylant/Klett-Cotta/Le Monnier.
Google Scholar
Kaplan, Leonard. 2012. The political – From Weimar to the present. In The Weimar moment, ed. Leonard Kaplan and Koshar, 185 et seqq. Plymouth: Lexington Books.
Google Scholar
Kelly, Duncan. 2004. Revisiting the rights of man: Georg Jellinek on rights and the state. Law and History Review 22: 493–529.
Google Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 2004a. Legal education and the reproduction of hierarchy: A polemic against the system: A critical edition. New York: New York University Press.
Google Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 2004b. The disenchantment of logically formal legal rationality or Max Weber’s sociology in the genealogy of the contemporary mode of western legal thought. Hastings Law Journal 55: 1031 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 2006. Thoughts on coherence, social values and national traditions in private law. In The politics of a European civil code, ed. Hesselink, 9 et seqq. Den Haag: Kluwer International.
Google Scholar
Kiesow, Rainer. 2010. Rechtswissenschaft – was ist das? Juristenzeitung, 585 et. seqq.
Google Scholar
Lindseth, Peter. 2005. ‘Always embedded’ administration: The historical evolution of administrative justice as an aspect of modern governance. In The economy as polity – The political constitution of contemporary capitalism, ed. Joerges, Stråt, and Wagner, 117 et seqq. London: UCL Press.
Google Scholar
Lock, Tobias. 2009. Why the European Union is not a state – Some critical remarks. European Constitutional Law Review 5: 407 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Maier, Mischa. 2004. Justinian – Herrschaft, Reich und Religion. München: C.H. Beck.
Google Scholar
Majone, Giandomenico. 1994. The rise of the regulatory state in Europe. West European Politics 17(3): 77–101.
Google Scholar
Majone, Giandomenico (ed.). 1996. Regulating Europe. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Majone, Giandomenico. 1998. Europe’s “Democratic Deficit”: The question of standards. European Law Journal 4: 13 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Majone, Giandomenico. 2010. Foundations of risk regulation: Science, decision-making, policy learning and institutional reform. European Journal of Risk Regulation 1: 5 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Markensis, B., Hannes Unberath, and Angus Johnston. 2006. The German law of contract. Oxford: Hart.
Google Scholar
Mathis, Klaus. 2013. Cultures of administrative law in Europe: From Weberian Bureaucracy to ‘law and economics. In Towards a European legal culture, eds. Helleringer and Purnhagen. München/Oxford/Baden-Baden (forthcoming).
Google Scholar
Mayer, Otto. 1924. Deutsches Verwaltungsrecht, 3rd ed. München: Duncker & Humblot.
Google Scholar
Meier, Friedrich. 1857. Grundzüge des Verwaltungs-Rechts und -Rechtsverfahrens.
Google Scholar
Micklitz, Hans-W. 2002. An expanded and systemized community consumer law as alternative or complement? European Business Law Review 13: 583 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Micklitz, Hans-W. 2007. Some considerations on Cassis de Dijon and the control of unfair contract terms in consumer contracts. In The future of European contract law: Essays in honour of Ewoud Hondius, ed. Boele-Woelki and Grosheide. New York: Wolters Kluwer Aspen Publishing.
Google Scholar
Micklitz, Hans-W. 2008. Book review Bettina Heiderhoff: Grundstrukturen des nationalen und eu-ropäischen Verbrauchervertragsrechts, insbesondere zur Reichweite europäischer Auslegung. Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht 72: 409.
Google Scholar
Micklitz, Hans-W. 2010a. Judicial activism of the European court of justice and the development of the European social model in anti-discrimination and consumer law. In The role of courts in developing a European social model – Theoretical and methodological perspectives, ed. Neergaard, Nielsen, and Roseberry. Copenhagen: DJØF Publishing.
Google Scholar
Micklitz, Hans-W. 2011. Introduction – Social justice and access justice in private law. In The many concepts of social justice in European private law, ed. Hans-W Micklitz, 3 et seqq. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Google Scholar
Micklitz, Hans-W, and Stephen Weatherill. 1994. Federalism and responsibility. In Federalism and responsibility, ed. Hans-W Micklitz, Stephen Weatherill, and Roethe. London/Dordrecht/Boston: Graham & Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff.
Google Scholar
Molle, Willem. 2006. The economics of European integration, 5th ed. Farnham: Ashgate.
Google Scholar
Moreno, Luis. 2003. Europeanisation, Mesogovernance and ‘Safety Nets’. European Journal of Political Research 42: 271 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Müller, Adam. 1936. Die Elemente der Staatskunst. Berlin.
Google Scholar
Nourse, Victoria, and Gregory Shaffer. 2009. Varieties of new legal realism: Can a new world order prompt a new legal theory? Cornell Law Review 95: 64 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Pankoke, Eckart, and Hans Nokielski. 1977. Verwaltungssoziologie. Stuttgart et al.: Kohlhammer.
Google Scholar
Pernice, Ingolf. 2006. Soll das Recht der Regulierungsverwaltung übergreifend geregelt werden? Europarechtliche Aspekte. In Verhandlungen des sechsundsechzigsten Deutschen Juristentages, ed. Ständige Desputation des Deutschen Juristentages, O 87 et seqq. München: C.H. Beck.
Google Scholar
Petersmann, Ernst-U. 2003. Constitutional economics, human rights and the WTO. Aussenwirtschaft 58: 49 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Posner, Richard. 2007. In Memoriam: Bernard D. Meltzer (1914–2007). University of Chicago Law Review 74.
Google Scholar
Pound, Roscoe. 1910. Law in the books and Law in action. American Law Review 44: 12 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Pound, Roscoe. 1923. Interpretation of Legal History, 1.
Google Scholar
Prechal, Sacha, and Bert van Roermund (eds.). 2008. The coherence of EU law – The search for unity in divergent concepts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Purnhagen, Kai. 2010a. Competition of agencies in European Pharmaceutical Law – Does it exist, is it desirable and how to handle it? European Journal of Risk Regulation 1: 227 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Purnhagen, Kai. 2013b. The architecture of post-national European contract law: A question of institutions? The Rabel Journal of Comparative and International Private Law (RabelsZ) 77 (forthcoming).
Google Scholar
Raiser, Thomas. 2008. Max Weber und die Rationalität des Rechts. Juristenzeitung 63: 853 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Reich, Norbert. 2008. AGM-COS.Met or: Who is protected by safety regulation? European Law Review 33: 86 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Roth, Günter. 2007a. § 241 BGB, Methode der Rechtsschöpfung und –darstellung. In Münchener Kommentar zum BGB, 5th (old) ed. München: C.H. Beck.
Google Scholar
Ruffert, Matthias. 2009. An den Grenzen des Integrationsverfassungsrechts: Das Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts zum Vertrag von Lissabon. Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt 124: 1198 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Schapp, Jan. 2009a. Einführung in das Bürgerliche Recht: Die Anspruchsnormen und ihre Anwendung. In Methodenlehre und System des Rechts, ed. Jan Schapp and J. Schapp, 54 et seqq. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Google Scholar
Schapp, Jan. 2009b. Probleme einer europäischen Juristenausbildung. In Methodenlehre und System des Rechts, ed. Jan Schapp, 227 et seq. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Google Scholar
Schepel, Harm. 2004. Professorenrecht? The field of European private law. In In lawyers’ circles – Lawyers and European legal integration, ed. Jettinghoff and Schepel. The Hague: Elsevier Reed.
Google Scholar
Schepel, Harm. 2005a. Professorenrecht? Le champ du droit européen. Critique Internationale 26: 147 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Schiavello, Aldo. 2004. On “Coherence” and “Law”: An analysis of different models (2001). Ratio Juris 14: 233 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Schluchter, Wolfgang. 1979. Die Entwicklung des Okzidentalen Rationalismus. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck [in English: Schluchter, Wolfgang. 1981. The rise of western rationalism – Max Weber’s developmental history. Trans. G. Roth. Berkeley: University of California Press].
Google Scholar
Schmidt, Karsten. 1990. Zivilistische Rechtsfiguren zwischen Rechtsdogmatik und Rechtspolitik. Exemplarisches zum Programm der Ringvorlesung. In Rechtsdogmatik und Rechtspolitik: Hamburger Ringvorlesung, ed. Karsten Schmidt. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Google Scholar
Schneider, Uwe. 1987. Zur Verantwortung der Rechtswissenschaft. Juristenzeitung 33: 699 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Schulze, Reiner. 1999. A century of Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch: German legal uniformity and European private law. Columbia Journal of European Law 5: 461 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Schuppert, Gunnar, and Christian Bumke. 2000. Die Konstitutionalisierung der Rechtsordnung. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Google Scholar
Schwartz, Louis. 1984. With gun and camera through darkest CLS-land. Stanford Law Review 36: 413 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Shavell, Steven. 1987. Economic analysis of accident law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar
Shaw, Jo, and Antje Wiener. 2000. The paradox of the European polity. In The state of the European Union 5: Risks, reform, resistance and revival, ed. Cowles Green and Smith, 65 et seqq. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 2001. Abram Chayes: A tribute. Harvard Law Review 114: 682 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Stollberg-Rillinger, Barbara. 1986. Der Staat als Maschine. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Google Scholar
Stürner, Rolf. 2012. Das Zivilrecht der Moderne und die Bedeutung der Rechtsdogmatik. Juristenzeitung, 10 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Sydow, Gernot. 2004. Verwaltungskooperation in der Europäischen Union. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Google Scholar
Teubner, Werner. 1974. Kodifikation und Rechtsreform in England. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Google Scholar
Tomuschat, Christian. 1997. Wer hat höhere Hoheitsgewalt? Humbold Forum Recht, Beitrag 8.
Google Scholar
Trentmann, Frank. 2007. Citizenship and consumption. Journal of Consumer Culture 7: 147 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Trimidas, Takis. 2006. The general principles of EU Law, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Tröger, Tobias. 2003. Zum Systemdenken im europäischen Schuldvertragsrecht – Probleme der Rechtsangleichung durch Richtlinien am Beispiel der Verbrauchsgüterkaufrichtlinie. Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht 11: 525 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Trubek, David. 1972. Max Weber on law and the rise of capitalism. Wisconsin Law Review 3: 720 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Trubek, David. 1984. Where the action is: Critical legal studies and empiricism. Stanford Law Review 36: 575 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Unger, Roberto. 1983. The critical legal studies movement. Harvard Law Review 96: 561 et seqq.
Google Scholar
van Caenegem, Roul. 2002. European law in the past, present and future. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Voermans, Wim, Chris Moll, Nico Floijn, and Peter van Lochem. 2008. Codification and consolidation in the European Union: A means to untie red tape. Statute Law Review 29: 65 et seqq.
Google Scholar
von Bogdandy, Armin. 2010. Founding principles. In Principles of European constitutional law, 2nd ed, ed. Armin von Bogdandy and Bast, 11 et seqq. Oxford/München/Baden-Baden: Hart/C.H. Beck/Nomos.
Google Scholar
von Gerber, Carl. 1865. Grundzüge eines Systems des Deutschen Staatsrechts. Leipzig: Verlag von Bernhard Tauchnitz.
Google Scholar
von Mehren, Arthur. 1998. Some reflections on codification and case law in the twenty-first century. University of California Davis Law Review 31: 659 et seqq.
Google Scholar
von Savigny, Carl. 1981. System des heutigen römischen Rechts. Aalen: Scientia (reprint from original 1840).
Google Scholar
von Stein, Lorenz. 1866–1884. Verwaltungslehre. Köln: Heymann.
Google Scholar
Walker, Neil. 2002. The idea of constitutional pluralism. The Modern Law Review 65: 317 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Walker, Neil. 2006. Constitutionalism and new governance in the European Union: Rethinking the boundaries. In Law and new governance in the EU and US, ed. Gráinne de Búrca and Scott. Oxford: Hart.
Google Scholar
Weber, Max. 1922. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, Grundriß der verstehenden Soziologie. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck [in English: Weber, Max. 1978. Economy and society (eds: Roth and Wittich, trans: Fischoff, E. et al.). Berkeley: University of California Press 1978].
Google Scholar
Weiler, Joseph. 1996. Der Staat “über alles”. Demos, Telos und die Maastricht-Entscheidung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts. Jahrbuch des Öffentlichen Rechts 44: 91 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Weiler, Joseph, and Joel Trachtman. 1997. European constitutionalism and its discontents. Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business 17: 354 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Weimer, Maria. 2010. The regulatory challenge of animal cloning for food. European Journal of Risk Regulation 1: 34 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Wenzel, Joachim. 2008. Die Bindung des Richters an Gesetz und Recht. Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 61: 341 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Wieacker, Franz. 1967. Privatrechtsgeschichte der Neuzeit unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der deutschen Entwicklung. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Google Scholar
Wiener, Jonathan. 2006. Better regulation in Europe. Current Legal Problems 59: 447 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Ziller, Jaques. 2009. Solange III (or the Bundesverfassungsgericht’s‚ Europe Friendlyness) On the decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court over the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. Rivista Italiana di Diritto Pubblico Comunitario, 973 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Zimmermann, Reinhard. 1995. Codification: History and present significance of an idea. European Review of Private Law 3: 101 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Zimmermann, Reinhard. 1996. Savigny’s legacy, comparative law, and the emergence of a European legal science. Law Quarterly Review 112: 567 et seqq.
Google Scholar
Case C-341/05, Judgment of the Court of 18 December 2007, Laval un Partneri Ltd v Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundet and Others [2007] ECR I-11767.
Google Scholar
Case C-438/05, Judgment of the Court of 11 December 2007, International Transport Workers’ Federation and Finnish Seamen’s Union v Viking Line ABP and OÜ Viking Line Eesti [2007] ECR I-10779.
Google Scholar
Case C-470/03, Judgment of the Court of 17 April 2007, AGM-COS.Met v Suomen valito v. Tanno Lehtinen [2007], ECR I-2749.
Google Scholar
Case C-555/07, Judgment of the Court of 19 January 2010, Kücükdeveci nyr.
Google Scholar
Bundesverfassungsgericht 2 BvR 2134, 2159/92, Decision of 12 October 1993, Maastricht, BVerfGE 89, 155.
Google Scholar
Bundesverfassungsgericht, 2 BvE 2/08, Decision of 30 June 2009, Lissabon, BVerfGE 123, 267, para 229; available at; English translation available at http://www.bverfg.de/entscheidungen/es20090630_2bve000208en.html
Verwaltungsgericht Köln, Deutsche Verwaltungblätter, 1978, Sealand, pp. 510–512.
Google Scholar
Library of Congress, http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/index.html
Publication Office of the EU, ‘eur-lex’, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOIndex.do
Publication Office of the EU, http://publications.europa.eu
USA Government Printing Office, http://www.gpo.gov/
USA National Archives, http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/publications/statutes.html
Council of the EU, European Parliament, European Commission. Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 ‘Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts’, OJ C 102/2, 4.4.1996.
Google Scholar
Council of the EU, Conclusions of the European Council in Ediburgh in 11–12 December 1992, SN 456/92, available at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/edinburgh/default_en.htm
European Commission, Communication from the Commission, ‘Follow-up to the Sutherland Report – Legislative Consolidation to Enhance the Transparancy of Community Law in the Area of the Internal Market’, COM(93) 361 final.
Google Scholar
European Commission, European Governance – A white paper, COM(2001) 428 final.
Google Scholar
High Level Group on the Operation of Internal Market, The Internal Market After 1992 – Meeting the Challenge, Report to the EEC Commission by the High Level Group on the Operation of Internal Market, presided over by Peter Sutherland – October 28, 1992, SEC(92), 2044.
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Law, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany
Kai Purnhagen

Authors

Kai Purnhagen
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Purnhagen, K. (2013). Mapping Systematization in EU Law. In: The Politics of Systematization in EU Product Safety Regulation: Market, State, Collectivity, and Integration. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol 26. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6543-6_2

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6543-6_2
Published: 01 April 2013
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-6542-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-6543-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics