Constititional judiciary in central europe and the europe agreement: Decision 30/1998 (VI.25) AB of the Hungarian constitutional court

International and Comparative Law Quarterly

Volumn 48, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 913-920

  Tatham, Allan ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84892317065     PISSN: 00205893     EISSN: 14716895     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0020589300063740     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Reported in the Hungarian [Official] Gazette, Magyar Közlöny 1998/55, p.4565.
2. See Decision of Slovene Constitutional Court on the EA, 5 June 1997, No.Rm-1/97 (admittedly this referred to a pre-ratification amendment of the Constitution) and several decisions of the Austrian Constitutional Court in respect of the EEC-Austria Agreement, including VfGH 15 Dec. 1993, B 945/91: (1994) 116 JBI. 678.
3. Law-Decree 27/1982 (Magyar Ko¯zlöny 1982 71, p.1218) which provided for the forms of promulgation and publication of international treaties. Subject to the revised Constitution and Act XI/1987 on legislation, the 1982 Law-Decree is still valid law in Hungary.
4. [1993] ABH [Collection of the Decisions of the Constitutional Court] 143.
5. [1993] ABH 327.
6. Magyar Közlöny 1994/1, p.1.
7. Magyar Közlöny 1996/120.
8. Lecturer at the Faculty of Law, Eötvös Loránd University [ELTE], Budapest
9. Magyar Közlöny 1997/7, p.636.
10. The matter would therefore have been different if the EA or IR had laid down the respective criteria. Such criteria in the acquis, ECJ rulings as well as EC legal provisions, have already been incorporated to some extent in the Hungarian Competition Act, Act LVII/1996 (Magyar Közlöny 1996756, p-3498).
11. On this point, in support of its contention, the Court cited to Case C-327/91 France v. Commission [1994] E.C.R. 1–3641,3678, according to which if the Commission enters into an international agreement with a non-member state, then it will be reviewable if it produces legal effects. It is to be noted that this is perhaps the first citation of an ECJ judgment made by a Hungarian judicial body.
12. The Court supported its argument on “double ruling” by express reference to the XXIVth Report on Competition Policy, COM(95) 142 final, art.402, p.284.