The Primacy of EU Law over National Law from the Perspective of International Law – A Legal Solution for Conflicts between Constitutional Courts and the CJEU?

SEHNÁLEK, David. The Primacy of EU Law over National Law from the Perspective of International Law – A Legal Solution for Conflicts between Constitutional Courts and the CJEU? In II. Polish-Hungarian Scientific Forum (International Law). 2026.

Základní údaje

Originální název

The Primacy of EU Law over National Law from the Perspective of International Law – A Legal Solution for Conflicts between Constitutional Courts and the CJEU?

Autoři

SEHNÁLEK, David

Vydání

II. Polish-Hungarian Scientific Forum (International Law), 2026

---

Další údaje

Jazyk

angličtina

Typ výsledku

Prezentace na konferencích

Obor

50501 Law

Označené pro přenos do RIV

Ne

Organizační jednotka

Právnická fakulta

Klíčová slova anglicky

Primacy of EU Law; Constitutional Courts; udicial Dialogue; CJEU; Constitutional Identity; Ultra Vires; International Law; Rule of Law

Příznaky

Mezinárodní význam

---

Anotace

V originále

This contribution explored the complex relationship between the primacy of European Union law and the sovereignty of national constitutional orders, primarily through the lens of public international law. It analyzed the causes of conflicts between the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and national constitutional courts, which stem from differing values and legal qualifications. The presentation examines the case law of constitutional courts in Poland, Hungary, Germany, the Czech Republic, and other Member States, which establish "counter-limits" (controlimiti) to the absolute primacy of EU law. The core of the analysis classified models of "judicial dialogue"—ranging from strategic and constructive engagement (the Taricco case) to the breakdown of dialogue and open conflict (the PSPP case or the Polish ruling K 3/21). The main part of my contrubition was focused on the perspective of international law and solution of the conflict through the lens of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. I argued that the EU cannot fully escape public international law and there are serious arguments based on rules of interpretation that have to be taken into the account when discussing the relation between the EU law and domestic law. In conclusion, I argued that while judicial dialogue can mitigate tensions, a lasting resolution requires mutual institutional restraint and potential political measures, such as treaty revisions or constitutional amendments, as the current state of legal uncertainty is unsustainable.