The Taricco saga and the consolidation of judicial dialogue in the European Union

Abstract

In December 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered its awaited decision on the Taricco II case, responding to a preliminary reference from the Italian Corte Costituzionale. The latter, unhappy with the outcome of the earlier Taricco I decision, asked for a re-interpretation of Article 325 TFEU and threatened the Court of Justice with the possible activation of its controlimiti doctrine. The CJEU partially 'corrected' its previous ruling and prevented an open conflict between EU law and Italian constitutional law. This case note discusses the saga and its three episodes against the background of the growing constitutional conversation between top European courts. It argues that Taricco is a positive episode of judicial dialogue and may further contribute to its consolidation: on one hand, constitutional courts are increasingly willing to 'play the game' and refer to the CJEU under Article 267 TFEU; on the other, the Court of Justice seems more reactive than in the past to constitutional courts' claims and now considers them with increasing attention and detail. Finally, the case note reflects on the partially diverging languages for constitutional dialogue: national courts use the language of constitutional identity, while the CJEU prefers to refer to the 'common constitutional principles of the EU'.

Clausole „europee” implicite ed esplicite nella Costituzione italiana

“…Senza ammettere questa diversità minima, l'ordinamento dell'Unione europea smarrirebbe il proprio fondamento: "in caso contrario i Trattati europei mirerebbero contraddittoriamente a dissolvere il fondamento costituzionale stesso dal quale hanno tratto origine per volontà degli Stati membri" (così l'ordinanza n. 24 del 2017 con cui la Corte costituzionale ha sollevato questione pregiudiziale alla Corte di giustizia sul c.d. "caso Taricco": su di essa Piccirilli, 2018;Bonelli, 2018;Tega, 2019).…”

Prijevare s PDV-om na razini Europske unije u hrvatskom kaznenom pravu i praksi

“…Naime isporuke dobara i usluga između država članica oslobođene su plaćanja PDV-a, a porezni obveznici koji u takvim isporukama sudjeluju imaju pravo na odbitak pretporeza. 1 Zajednički sustav PDV-a u EU-u reguliran je odredbama Direktive Vijeća 2006/112/EZ od 28. studenog 2006. o zajedničkom sustavu poreza na dodanu vrijednost (dalje u tekstu: Direktiva o PDV-u), što je sedma po redu direktiva kojom se uređuju pitanja vezana za PDV na razini EU-a, a u državama članicama trebala je biti implementirana do 1. siječnja 2008. 2 Sukladno poreznoj regulativi uspostavljenoj Direktivom o PDV-u na području EU-a dobra i usluge oporezuju se prema načelu odredišta, odnosno u onoj državi u kojoj se troše (bez obzira na to jesu li u toj državi proizvedena ili su u nju ušla s područja druge države članice).…”

The Elusive Contours of Constitutional Identity: Taricco as a Missed Opportunity

“…72 Rather than activating the controlimiti doctrine, the Corte Costituzionale opted to invite the CJEU to a process of judicial dialogue. 73 The argumentation of the Corte Costituzionale can be summarised as follows. Firstly, EU-wide harmonisation on limitation periods being absent, Member States should be able to maintain their own legal classification of such rules.…”