• azertyfun
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    IIRC it was one lower court case in Germany… That’s so many asterisk attached as to be meaningless, even if that judgement isn’t struck down or amended (unlikely), that still only applies to Germany (or was it one state within Germany?).

    The way the EU works is that it mandates each sovereign country to implement the mandate into their national laws, so jurisprudence in Germany doesn’t mean anything at all anywhere else.

    • Infinitus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also, courts in Europe can’t make laws like in the US. Their rulings aren’t considered to be law.

      • azertyfun
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s a bit more nuanced than that…

        Civil Law (used almost everywhere in the world outside the Commonwealth) still has Case Law, but it is held subordinate to legislation (itself usually built on top of Roman and Napoleonic law), whereas historically common law is built out of nothing but case law (because English kings had better things to do than concern themselves with the squabbles of peasants).

        Still, when presented with a novel case that isn’t specifically legislated for, judges in Civil Law countries can still make a ruling, and subsequent trials will have to take that ruling into acount.

      • Gladaed@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        How is that relevant? Just because some foreign entity has different laws doesn’t mean you cannot have yours. We shouldn’t always repeat us policy as gospel. Just look at their social policy nightmare.