Legal argumentation in the case law of the EAEU Court

Available in Russian

Price 499 Rub.

Author: Ekaterina Diyachenko

DOI: 10.21128/2226-2059-2024-1-41-55

Keywords: legal argumentation; judicial interpretation; precedent; EAEU Court; norms and principles of international law; judicial dialogue

Abstract

Legal argumentation plays a key role in ensuring the effectiveness and relevance of case law. In an integration union the effect of a judicial act on its application by Member States and union bodies depends on the argumentation’s depth and persuasiveness. This is especially important for the Eurasian Economic Union Court’s advisory opinions, which, contrary to its judgments, only possess res interpretata. An overview of the EAEU Court’s case law demonstrates that in its judgments and advisory opinions the EAEU Court primarily uses common methods of argumentation derived from traditional methods of interpretation. It relies essentially on linguistic and systemic arguments, with little use of teleological arguments, argumentum a contrario, or effet utile. These linguistic arguments often form the rationale in support of legal positions that other integration courts formulate exclusively using arguments based on the aims of the founding treaty or the useful effect of the legal norm. The EAEU Court’s case law contains several examples of legal comparativism, which serve as predicates for the formulation of concepts that did not exist in EAEU law. This type of argumentation allows the establishment of autonomous legal notions, applicable exclusively in the process of interpretation of integration law. The study also shows instances of legal argumentation based on norms and principles of international law. In the early stages of its functioning the EAEU Court had a propensity for using argumentation based on judicial dialogue, with numerous references to the acts of other integration courts. An analysis of the EAEU Court’s judgments and advisory opinions allows the author to conclude that, with the accumulation of its case law, the EAEU Court focused more on its own legal findings, leading to an increased used of precedents. The role of precedent as a source for legal argumentation of the EAEU Court’s acts lies in the fact that it is aimed not only at strengthening the legal reasoning of the judgment in a specific case, but also at formulating the content of a legal norm which, in the Court’s interpretation, might become an instrument for solving future cases. Precedent ensures the consistency and predictability of case law as well as its continuity. Departure from precedent necessitates a detailed explanation which can take the form of reference to different factual circumstances or of elaboration of a new line of reasoning.

About the author: Ekaterina Diyachenko – Canditate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Law, Counsellor to a Judge of the Eurasian Economic Union Court, Minsk, Belarus; Senior Researcher of the International Law Sector of the Institute of State and Law, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia.

Citation: Diyachenko E. (2024) Argumentatsiya v aktakh Suda Evraziyskogo ekonomicheskogo soyuza [Legal argumentation in the case law of the EAEU Court]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 41–55. (In Russian).

References

Chayka K.L. (2018) Mezhdunarodno-pravovye podkhody v praktike Suda Evraziyskogo ekonomicheskogo soyuza [International legal approaches in the practice of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, no.11, pp.138–151. (In Russian).
Diyachenko E. (2023) Sud Evraziyskogo ekonomicheskogo soyuza: kommentariy k konsul'tativnomu zaklyucheniyu ot 22 noyabrya 2022 goda po delu №SE-2-2/1-22 o sposobakh obespecheniya v gosudarstvennykh zakupkakh [Court of the Eurasian Economic Union: commentary on the Advisory Opinion of November 22, 2022 in case no.CE-2-2/1-22 on methods of providing guarantees in public procurement]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol.13, no.1, pp.21–28. (In Russian).
Diyachenko E.B. (2022) Per aspera ad astra: primenenie prava Evraziyskogo ekonomicheskogo soyuza sudami Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Per aspera ad astra: application of the law of the Eurasian Economic Union by the courts of the Russian Federation]. Trudy Instituta gosudarstva i prava Rossiyskoy akademii nauk, no.6, pp.121–139. (In Russian).
Diyachenko E.B. (2022) Primenenie prava EAES natsional'nymi sudebnymi organami i razvitie mezhsudebnogo dialoga [Application of the EAEU law by national courts and development of judicial dialogue]. Pravoprimenenie, no.4, pp.244–260. (In Russian).
Diyachenko E.B., Entin K.V. (2021) Rol' konsul'tativnykh zaklyucheniy Suda EAES v razvitii prava konkurentsii Evraziyskogo ekonomicheskogo soyuza [The role of the EAEU Court’s advisory opinions in development of the Eurasian Economic Union’s competition law]. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, no.4, pp.177–204. (In Russian).
Entin K. (2021) Rol' mezdunarodnykh dogovorov i mezdunarodnogo obychnogo prava v pravoporyadke ES i EAES [The role of international agreements and international customary law in the EU and EAEU legal orders]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol.11, no.1, pp.102–130. (In Russian).
Entin K., Pirker B. (2020) Svobodnoe dvizhenie lits v EAES: mezhdu Civis Eurasiaticus i Homo Oeconomicus [Free movement of people in the EAEU: between Civis Eurasiaticus and Homo Oeconomicus]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol.10, no.1, pp.79–96. (In Russian).
Gadzhiev Kh.I. (2021) Vliyanie pravovoy argumentatsii na effektivnost' mezhdunarodnogo i na­tsional'nogo pravosudiya [The impact of legal argumentation on the effectiveness of international and national justice]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, no.6, pp.148–161. (In Russian).
Pirker B., Entin K. (2019) Bosman’s Second Life? The Eurasian Economic Union Court and the Free Movement of Professional Athletes. Legal Issues of Economic Integration, vol.46, no.2, pp.129–148.