For many years, the ECJ has postulated the autonomy of the EU legal
order. At the same time, it has also stressed the importance of noting that the
UN and the EU are distinct legal orders. In light of this situation, we have
one and the same international organization applying two diametrically
opposed theoretical doctrines. Regarding the inner relationship with its
Member States, the ECJ proclaims a unified legal order based on the
monistic doctrine. Dualistic arguments, in contrast, serve to separate the EU
legal order from international law. This paper intends to clarify whether this
obvious contradiction is due to a simple misinterpretation by the ECJ or is
grounded in flaws within the almost 100 year old theories of monism and
dualism which can no longer serve to explain the relationship between legal
orders satisfactorily. The paper concludes that the situation cannot be
characterized as black and white. However, in order to establish
fundamental foundations, a clear theoretical line is essential.
«For many years, the ECJ has postulated the autonomy of the EU legal
order. At the same time, it has also stressed the importance of noting that the
UN and the EU are distinct legal orders. In light of this situation, we have
one and the same international organization applying two diametrically
opposed theoretical doctrines. Regarding the inner relationship with its
Member States, the ECJ proclaims a unified legal order based on the
monistic doctrine. Dualistic arguments, in contrast...
»