Culture de l'argumentation et déconstruction du désaccord devant la Cour de justice de l'Union Européenne
Abstract
The idea that European Union law has a distinct structure and generates a new set of legal
concepts and arguments is firmly rooted in the self-consciousness of EU lawyers. One of the most obvious
reasons for this is the awareness of the inherently precarious and conflictual character of the process of
European integration. The fashioning of EU law through the European Court of justice’s adjudication
was therefore meant to render this process less conflictual and more resistant and resilient. This conception
is hardly tenable in today’s Europe. European integration is currently undergoing its most acute crisis. In
this context, it is worth reviewing the operation of EU law in the light of the notion of ‘disagreement’ or
‘controversy’. How is disagreement dealt with while it cannot be assumed that the Court of Justice of the
European Union remains agnostic about political preferences and social conflicts, ideological differences
and value choices? This article is an attempt to explore EU law adjudication taking the ideas of
disagreement and controversy seriously, as epistemological devices for the exploration of the EU case law.