English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This paper explores the differences between and the similarities of how domestic courts - mainly the Dutch - apply two distinct forms of non-domestic law: public international law and European Community law. The article focuses on the application of the principle that in both areas dominates practice: the principle that courts should, whenever possible, construe national law in conformity with, respectively, public international law and European Community law. The article systematically compares how courts employ this principle. On the basis of a detailed analysis of the relevant national case law and the case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), it is argued that there is no fundamental divide between the application of public international law and EC law (despite the theoretically opposing starting points); differences in application are a matter of degree not of principle. The principle of consistent interpretation proves to be effective and of great practical importance in both areas and further testifies of the similarities in the impact of the two areas on domestic law.

european journal of international law

Giving Effect to Public International Law and European Community Law before Domestic Courts: A Comparative Analysis of the Practice of Consistent Interpretation