1 For a very recent contribution on the matter, see Komarek, Jan, The Place of Constitutional Courts in the EU, 9 EuConst 420 (2013). See also Martinico, Giuseppe, Preliminary Reference and Constitutional Courts: Are You in the Mood for Dialogue?, Tilburg Institute of Comparative and Transnational Law Working Paper 2009/10, available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1483664. See generally Morten Broberg & Niels Fenger, Preliminary References to the European Court of Justice (2014).Google Scholar

2 See, i.e., Perez, Aida Torres, Constitutional Dialogue on the European Arrest Warrant: The Spanish Constitutional Court Knocking on Luxembourg's Door, 8 EuConst 105 (2012); Filippo Fontanelli and Giuseppe Martinico, Between Procedural Impermeability and Constitutional Openness: The Italian Constitutional Court and Preliminary References to the European Court of Justice, 16 ELJ 345 (2010); Laffaille, Franck, Il y a toujours une première fois. A propos de l'application de l'article 234 TCE par la Cour constitutionnelle italienne, 45 Revue trimestrielle de droit europeen [RTDE] 459 (2009).Google Scholar

3 Bundesverfassungsgericht [BVerfG - The Federal Constitutional Court], Case No. 2 BvR 2728/13, (Feb. 7, 2014), available at https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/en/decisions/rs20140114_2bvr272813en.html. A detailed press release is available at https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/en/press/bvg14–009en.html.Google Scholar

4 Technical Features of the Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT Decision), Governing Council of the European Central Bank of (Sept. 6, 2012). A press release is available at http://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pr/date/2012/html/pr120906_1.en.html.Google Scholar

5 See also Press Conference of 6 September 2012, available at http://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pressconf/2012/html/is120906.en.html.Google Scholar

6 BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2728/13 at paras. 56–83.Google Scholar

7 Id. at paras. 84–98.Google Scholar

8 Id. at paras. 99–100.Google Scholar

9 See, for example, the statement of Michael Hüther from the Cologne Institute for Economic Research. Michael Hüther, Europe or Democracy? What German Court Ruling Means for the Euro, Der Spiegel Online, Feb. 10, 2014, available at http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/german-court-calls-ecb-bond-buying-into-question-a-952556.html.Google Scholar

10 Dissenting Opinions of Justice Lübbe-Wolff and Justice Gerhardt, BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2728/13.Google Scholar

11 BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2728/13 at paras. 99–100.Google Scholar

12 See, particularly in this respect, the preliminary reference of the Spanish Constitutional Court in Stefano Melloni v. Ministerio Fiscal, Case C-399/11 (Feb. 26, 2013). On this reference, see Aida Torres Perez, supra note 2. See also the preliminary request made by the French Conseil Constitutionnel in Jeremy F v. Premier Ministre, Case C-168/13 PPU (May 30, 2013). On this reference, see Henri Labayle and Mehdi Rostane, Le Conseil constitutionnel, le mandat d'arrět européen et le renvoi préjudiciel à la Cour de justice, 29 RFDA 461 (2013); Gautier, Marie, L’ entrée timide du Conseil constitutionnel dans le système juridictionnel européen, 69 AJDA 1086 (2013); Levade, Anne, Anatomie d ‘une première: renvoi préjudiciel du Conseil constitutionnel à la Cour de justice!, La Semaine Juridique—Édition Générale 1111 (2013).Google Scholar

13 Honeywell Bremsbelag GmbH, Bundesverfassungsgericht [BVerfG - The Federal Constitutional Court], Case No. 2 BvR 2661/06 (July 6, 2010), available at http://www.bverfg.de/en/decisions/rs20100706_2bvr266106en.html. For more information on this case, see Pliakos, Asteris & Anagnostaras, Georgios, Who is the Ultimate Arbiter? The Battle over Judicial Supremacy in EU Law, 36 ELRev 109 (2011); Payandeh, Mehrdad, Constitutional Review of EU Law After Honeywell: Contextualising the Relationship Between the German Constitutional Court and the Court of Justice of the European Union, 48 CMLRev 9 (2011); Mahlmann, Matthias, The Politics of Constitutional Identity and its Legal Frame—The Ultra Vires Decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court, 11 German L.J. 1407 (2010); Möllers, Christoph, Constitutional Review of European Acts Only Under Exceptional Circumstances, 7 EuConst 161 (2011).Google Scholar

14 Werner Mangold v. Rüdiger Helm, CJEU Case C-144/04, 2005 E.C.R. I-9981.Google Scholar

15 BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2661/06 at paras. 56–59.Google Scholar

16 Id. at para. 60.Google Scholar

17 See, particularly in this respect, Spanish Constitutional Court, Declaration 1/2004 (Dec. 13, 1004) (European Constitution), annotated by Schutte, Camilo, Tribunal Constitucional on the European Constitution: Declaration of 13 December 2004, 1 EuConst 281 (2005) and García, Ricardo Alonso, The Spanish Constitution and the European Constitution: The Script for a Virtual Collision and Other Observations on the Principle of Primacy, 6 German L.J. 1001 (2005); Accession Treaty, Judgment K 18/04, Polish Constitutional Court (May 11, 2005), annotated by Kowalik-Banczyk, Krystyna, Should We Poish it Up?, 6 German L.J. 1355 (2005); Treaty of Lisbon I, Czech Constitutional Court, Decision Pl. ÚS 19/08 (Nov. 26, 2008), annotated by Bríza, Petr, The Constitutional Court on the Lisbon Treaty Decision of 26 November 2008, 5 EuConst 143 (2009).Google Scholar

18 Slovak Pensions, Pl. ÚS 5/12, Czech Constitutional Court (Jan. 31, 2012), available at http://www.concourt.cz/view/pl-05–12. See, particularly in this respect, Zbíral, Robert, A Legal Revolution or Negligible Episode? Court of Justice Decision Proclaimed Ultra Vires, 49 CMLRev 1475 (2012); Komárek, Jan, Czech Constitutional Court Playing with Matches: The Czech Constitutional Court Declares a Judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU Ultra Vires, 8 EuConst 323 (2012); Anagnostaras, Georgios, Activation of the Ultra Vires Review: The Slovak Pensions Judgment of the Czech Constitutional Court, 14 German L.J. 959 (2013).Google Scholar

19 Marie Landtová v. Česká správa socialního zabezpečení, CJEU Case C-399/09, 2011 E.C.R. I-5573.Google Scholar

20 See, in this respect, Zbíral, Robert, Nuclear War Between the Czech Constitutional Court and the Court of Justice (Hopefully) Averted, Verfassungsblog (Jan. 9, 2013), available at http://www.verfassungsblog.de/de/czech-constitutional-court-war-averted/#.UxH5Avl_uoN.Google Scholar

21 Articles 119 and 127 et seq. TFEU and Articles 17 et seq. ESBC Statute (mandate of the ECB); Article 123 TFEU (prohibition of monetary financing of the budget).Google Scholar

22 See, particularly in this respect, Thym, Daniel, A Spring in the Desert: The German ECJ Reference on the ECB Bond Purchases, available at http://www.verfassungsblog.de/en/eine-quelle-in-der-wueste/#.UxIMfPl_uoM.Google Scholar

23 BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2728/13 at para. 100.Google Scholar

24 See also, in this respect, Miller, Russell, The “Rumble in Karlsruhe: The German Federal Constitutional Court's Historic OMT Case, available at http://www.iconnectblog.com/2014/02/the-rumble-in-karlsruhe-the-german-federal-constitutional-courts-historic-omt-case-february-7–2014/.Google Scholar

25 BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2728/13 at paras. 102–103.Google Scholar

26 Fazenda Pública v. Câmara Municipal do Porto, CJEU Case C-446/98, 2000 E.C.R. I-11435, para. 49.Google Scholar

27 Firma Foto-Frost v. Hauptzzollamt Lübeck-Ost, CJEU Case C-314/85, 1987 E.C.R. 4199, paras. 15–20; International Air Transport Association and European Low Fares Airline Association v Department for Transport, CJEU C-344/04, 2006 E.C.R. I-403, para. 27; Ministero dell'Industria, del Commercio e dell'Artigianato v. Lucchini SpA, CJEU C-119/05, 2007 E.C.R. I-6199, para. 53.Google Scholar

28 Mecanarte - Metalúrgica da Lagoa Ldª^a v. Chefe do Serviço da Conferěncia Final da Alfândega do Porto, CJEU Case C-348/89, 1991 E.C.R. I-3277, paras. 43–46.Google Scholar

29 Aziz Melki and Sélim Abdeli, CJEU Joined Cases C-188/10 and C-189/10, 2010 E.C.R. I-5667. See on this ruling Moonen, Toon, Proceedings Against Aziz Melki and Selim Abdeli or How the Last Shall Be the First: The Court of Justice Rules on Priority Constitutional Review, 17 ColumJEurL 129 (2010/2011); Pliakos, Asteris, Le contrôle de constitutionnalité et le droit de l'Union européenne: la réaffirmation du principe de primauté, CDE 487 (2010); Saliceti, Alessandro Ianniello, Consitution et primaut: un bilan jusqu'à l'arrět Melki et Abdeli, RUE 583 (2010).Google Scholar

30 Id. at paras. 54–55.Google Scholar

31 See also the interview of Professor Franz Mayer, available at http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/cps/rde/xchg/SID-0BD8A7DD-D95FA988/bst_engl/hs.xsl/nachrichten_119997.htm.Google Scholar

32 Pliakos & Anagnostaras, supra note 13, at 122.Google Scholar

33 Case C-62/14 Gauweiler and Others. Google Scholar

34 Seda Kücükdeveci v Swedex GmbH & Co. KG, CJEU Case C-555/07, 2010 E.C.R. I-365. For more on this ruling, see its annotation by Wiesbrock, Anja, Case Note – Case C-555/07, Kücükdeveci v. Swedex, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 19 January 2010, 11 German L.J. 539 (2010). See also the case note by Thüsing, Gregor & Horler, Sally, Case C-555/07, Seda Kücükdeveci v. Swedex, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 19 January 2010, 47 CMLRev 1161 (2010).Google Scholar

35 Id. at paras. 18–27.Google Scholar

36 Werner Mangold v. Rüdiger Helm, CJEU Case C-144/04, 2005 E.C.R. I-9981, paras. 74–78.Google Scholar

37 BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2661/06.Google Scholar

38 Gauweiler Die Linke v. Act of Approval of the Lisbon Treaty (Lisbon), Bundesverfassungsgericht [BVerfG - The Federal Constitutional Court], Case No. 2 BvE 2/08 (June 30, 2009), available at http://www.bverfg.de/en/decisions/es20090630_2bve000208en.html. This ruling gave rise to an immense amount of academic literature. See amongst others Doukas, Dimitrios, The Verdict of the German Federal Constitutional Court on the Lisbon Treaty: Not Guilty but Don't Do it Again, 34 ELRev 866 (2009); Ziller, Jacques, The German Constitutional Court's Friendliness Towards European Law, 16 EPL 53 (2010); Thym, Daniel, In the Name of Sovereign Statehood: A Critical Introduction to the Lisbon Judgment of the German Constitutional Court, 46 CMLRev 1795 (2009); Grimm, Dieter, Defending Sovereign Statehood Against Transforming the European Union into a State, 5 EuConst 353 (2009); Bieber, Ronald, An Association of Sovereign States, 5 EuConst 391 (2009); Lock, Tobias, Why the European Union is Not a State, 5 EuConst 407 (2009); Schönberger, Christoph, Lisbon in Karlsruhe: Maastricht's Epigones at Sea, 10 German L.J. 1201 (2009); Halberstam, Daniel & Möllers, Christoph, The German Constitutional Court Says “Ja zu Deutschland!”, 10 German L.J. 1241 (2009).Google Scholar

39 BVerfG, Case No. 2 BvR 2661/06 at paras. 67–79.Google Scholar

40 See also Lindseth, Peter, Barking v. Biting: Understanding the German Constitutional Court's OMT Reference, available at http://eutopialaw.com/2014/02/10/barking-vs-biting-understanding-the-german-constitutional-courts-omt-reference-and-its-implications-for-eu-reform/.Google Scholar

41 See also Daniel Thym, supra note 22.Google Scholar

42 Thomas Pringle v. Government of Ireland and Others, CJEU Case C-370/12 (Nov. 27, 2012). See, on this ruling, Craig, Paul, Pringle and Use of EU Institutions Outside the EU Legal Framework: Foundations, Procedure and Substance, 9 EuConst 263 (2013); Stanislas, Adam, Parras, Mena & Javier, Francisco, The European Stability Mechanism through the Legal Meanderings of the Union's Constitutionalism: Comment on Pringle, 38 ELRev 848 (2013); Koedooder, Chris, The Pringle Judgment: Economic and/or Monetary Union?, 37 Fordham Int'l L.J. 111 (2013).Google Scholar

43 Treaty Establishing the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), Feb. 2, 2012, available at http://www.european-council.europa.eu/media/582311/05-tesm2.en12.pdf.Google Scholar