The EU System of Judicial Protection: Between Original Intent and Subsequent Practice

Why does the European Union have its own Court of Justice? Why does it have Advocates General but not dissenting opinions? Why does the Court of Justice interpret the notion of “individual concern" so restrictively? Why is the preliminary ruling often employed as the European citizen's infringement directive? Why does the European Commission enjoy broad discretion in launching and pursuing infringement procedures? Relying on the analysis of the preparatory work of the Treaties of Paris and Rome and several ECJ judgments from the so-called foundational period, this talk seeks to answer these questions, showing how the key features of the EU system of judicial protection are the outcome of a unique combination of original design and subsequent practice.

Amedeo Arena is a Full Professor of European Union Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of Naples Federico II and an Alcide De Gasperi Fellow at the Historical Archives of the European Union. He is the Principal Investigator of the PRIN 2022 project “Rediscovering European Integration through Legal Storytelling (REILS)," which re-examines foundational European Court of Justice rulings by combining traditional legal analysis with an in-depth exploration of procedural histories, key figures, and narratives. Among his notable scholarly contributions is a paper that explores the lesser-known background of the ECJ's landmark judgment in Costa v. ENEL. He has also authored biographical works on key figures in European integration, such as Nicola Catalano, Rino Rossi, and Gian Galeazzo Stendardi.

As seating capacity at this event is limited, please register here if you attend in person.

If you would like to attend the event online, please register with Anna Quadflieg (quadflieg@lhlt.mpg.de) by 25 September at 12.00 to receive the login details.

A paper on the presentation will be sent to all participants prior to the event.