Konstituciniai teismai Europos Sąjungos teisinėje erdvėje

Abstract

This article defines differences between courts of the member states, performing constitutional control. It is stated that two main models of such control exist: American model based on constitutional control performed via main competence courts and European (also referred to as Austrian) model, which is distinct for the presence of constitutional court that is established for the specific aim.
Constitutional courts established as separate courts have a monopoly of legal acts constitution supervision.
Courts, having constitutional jurisdiction, belong to the hierarchy of main competence courts; they solve constitutional issues and perform legal acts’ constitution supervision function which does not exist in common courts.
The article emphasizes that European Court of Justice although having characteristic features of national constitutional courts, but also because its’ competence is considerably wider than constitutional courts is more similar to the Supreme Court, having constitutional jurisdiction.
The article analyses problems of European Court of Justice and national constitution courts, thus explaining the reason of idle recognition of superiority of European Community law.
The article discusses if Constitutional courts are covered in the notion defined in the article 234 “Courts and Tribunals” of the Establishment Agreement. Case analysis, taking into consideration opinions of ECJ and constitutional courts is presented. Constitutional courts’ obligation to apply to European Court of Justice is suggested. The article covers some member states constitutional courts’ opinion regarding cooperation with ECJ.