Beyond Multilingualism: On Different Approaches to the Handling of Diverging Language Versions of a Community Law

Abstract

Abstract This article deals with a problem created by the EU's multilingualism, the fallibility of translators and the ruses of politicians: for different reasons, it is quite common that equally authentic language versions of a Community law have different meanings if taken on their own. While the ECJ's uniform interpretation approach to this problem, which must be seen as required under the non‐discrimination principle, has permitted equitable results in those cases decided by the ECJ, it would not be adequate for the simplest type of case, ie that a citizen has every reason to trust her own language version of a law. In such a case, her legitimate expectations in the equal authenticity of that version requires protection. De lege lata the article therefore proposes, in the interest of generally equitable solutions, a balancing, in the individual case, of the protection of legitimate expectations and the non‐discrimination principle. De lege ferenda it proposes a more radical solution, ie that there be only one authentic version of every Community law.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 100 citations exist upstream.