Publikation: A Bird’s Eye View on ECJ Judgments on Immigration, Asylum and Border Control Cases
Dateien
Datum
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
Internationale Patentnummer
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Sammlungen
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Publikationstyp
Publikationsstatus
Erschienen in
Zusammenfassung
Many experts of EU migration law deal with ECJ judgments on a regular basis, but they rarely reflect on how individual rulings on diverse themes such as asylum, family reunification or return relate to each other. This article fills that gap and presents a horizontal analysis of 155 judgments combining quantitative and qualitative findings. Our statistical survey shows that selected themes and references from certain countries dominate the ECJ’s activities. In qualitative terms, the article considers three overarching themes: the concept of public policy; the practice of statutory interpretation, including in light of objectives: the principle of proportionality and interaction with domestic courts. Our study shows that the search for cross-sectoral coherence defines much of the case law, although success of this venture is compromised by enduring inconsistencies, which complicate the emergence of a reliable and predictable judicial approach towards the interpretation of secondary legislation on migration.
Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
Zitieren
ISO 690
THYM, Daniel, 2019. A Bird’s Eye View on ECJ Judgments on Immigration, Asylum and Border Control Cases. In: European Journal of Migration and Law. 2019, 21(2), pp. 166-193. ISSN 1388-364X. eISSN 1571-8166. Available under: doi: 10.1163/15718166-12340046BibTex
@article{Thym2019-05-07Birds-46059, year={2019}, doi={10.1163/15718166-12340046}, title={A Bird’s Eye View on ECJ Judgments on Immigration, Asylum and Border Control Cases}, number={2}, volume={21}, issn={1388-364X}, journal={European Journal of Migration and Law}, pages={166--193}, author={Thym, Daniel} }
RDF
<rdf:RDF xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/" xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/46059"> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2019-06-19T12:49:44Z</dcterms:available> <dc:creator>Thym, Daniel</dc:creator> <dcterms:issued>2019-05-07</dcterms:issued> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Many experts of EU migration law deal with ECJ judgments on a regular basis, but they rarely reflect on how individual rulings on diverse themes such as asylum, family reunification or return relate to each other. This article fills that gap and presents a horizontal analysis of 155 judgments combining quantitative and qualitative findings. Our statistical survey shows that selected themes and references from certain countries dominate the ECJ’s activities. In qualitative terms, the article considers three overarching themes: the concept of public policy; the practice of statutory interpretation, including in light of objectives: the principle of proportionality and interaction with domestic courts. Our study shows that the search for cross-sectoral coherence defines much of the case law, although success of this venture is compromised by enduring inconsistencies, which complicate the emergence of a reliable and predictable judicial approach towards the interpretation of secondary legislation on migration.</dcterms:abstract> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/44"/> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2019-06-19T12:49:44Z</dc:date> <dc:contributor>Thym, Daniel</dc:contributor> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/46059"/> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/> <dcterms:title>A Bird’s Eye View on ECJ Judgments on Immigration, Asylum and Border Control Cases</dcterms:title> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/44"/> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>