The essay takes, as a starting point, Judgment n. 6\/2018 of the Constitutional Court and the Court of Cassation’s approach in favour of a dynamic\u00a0conception of jurisdiction in addressing the issues arising when judgments\u00a0given by national administrative courts contrast with preceding or subsequent\u00a0rulings of the European Court of Justice or of the European Court of Human\u00a0Rights. In examining the range of solutions that emerge from the many\u00a0theoretical declinations of the problem (and from the various concepts of\u00a0jurisdiction), the paper focuses on the effects that supranational legal systems have on the mechanisms envisaged by national administrative procedural law,\u00a0with particular reference to revision. The background to the analysis also\u00a0includes the overarching topics of dialogue between courts and of the relationship between the Court of Cassation and the Council of State.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The essay takes, as a starting point, Judgment n. 6\/2018 of the Constitutional Court and the Court of Cassation’s approach in favour of a dynamic\u00a0conception of jurisdiction in addressing the issues arising when judgments\u00a0given by national administrative courts contrast with preceding or subsequent\u00a0rulings of the European Court of Justice or of the European Court of<\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n