Crisis Jurisprudence

• Department of Law

PhD thesis defence by Eftychia Constantinou

As the European Union’s (EU) long crisis decade unfolded, EU institutions adapted and, when necessary, drastically changed their practices to address crisis demands. The Court of Justice of the European Union (the Court) is no exception. Its reasoning in cases concerning crisis measures displayed notable creativity. Yet the Court’s broader response to crises, beyond its adjudication of crisis-related cases, remains understudied. While existing scholarship has alluded to a link between political developments and the Court’s jurisprudential shift in citizenship, it remains unclear under what conditions, and through which mechanisms, it responds to crises. The thesis investigates whether the Court’s interpretation of European citizenship rights, specifically its choice of legal basis, its citations to earlier decisions and the timing of its judgments, during the financial crisis and Brexit differs from ‘normal times’ and is contextually calibrated. It presents the first empirical study of all citizenship judgmeconceptualising this shift as a crisis jurisprudence: a form of adjudication where the Court 'muddles through' a crisis by tailoring its use of pre-existing legal tools to contextual demands, issuing politically acceptable and legally defensible rulings. Crisis jurisprudence as an analytical lens provides a novel framework for understanding the Court’s nuanced responsiveness to contextual pressures across crises and legal domains.

The Zoom link will be sent upon registration.