The Centre–Periphery Antagonism in Adjudication: A Case Study on the Spatial Dimension of the Political

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6069.94.07

Keywords:

adjudication, the political, centre, periphery, spatial justice

Abstract

One of the key elements of the critical theory of adjudication is the identification of an objective antagonism that is at stake behind a given court case. The identification of the antagonism allows to develop an axis, along which interpretive possibilities can be spread and arranged from those most favourable to social group A (e.g. workers) to that most favourable to social group B (e.g. businesses). The paper discusses the famous Laval–Viking case-law which was concerned with the fundamental rights of workers (right to strike and undertake collective action) and their relation to the economic freedoms of businesses, seeking to escape the high standards of worker protection in their own country either by changing the flag of a ship to a flag of convenience (Viking) or by importing cheap labour force from abroad, without guaranteeing the workers equal rights (Laval). Whereas the vast majority of scholars have interpreted the Viking–Laval jurisprudence as relating to the fundamental socio-economic antagonism opposing workers and businesses, the Slovenian scholar Damjan Kukovec has proposed an alternative reading. According to him, the real antagonism is ultimately between workers from the periphery (Central Europe, in casu Baltic countries) and workers from the centre (Western Europe, in casu Scandinavian countries). By introducing the spatial dimension to the political, Kukovec entirely changes the formulation of the underlying antagonism. The paper engages critically with Kukovec’s analysis and argues that the objective interest of Central European workers lies not in selling their labour at dumping prices, but gaining the same guarantees of social protection as existing in the West.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Barnard, Catherine. 2012. “A Proportionate Response to Proportionality in the Field of Collective Action.” European Law Review 37: 117–135.
Google Scholar

Blanpain, Roger. 2009. “Laval and Viking: Who Pays the Price?” In The Laval and Viking Cases: Freedom of Services and Establishment v. Industrial Conflict in the European Economic Area. 103–115. Edited by Roger Blanpain and Andrzej M. Świątkowski. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.
Google Scholar

Christodoulidis, Emilios. 2013. “The European Court of Justice and “Total Market” Thinking.” German Law Journal 14(10): 2005–2020.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200002613

Dębska, Hanna. 2016. “Strategia wielopozycyjności w półperyferyjnym polu prawnym. Homo academicus na rynku” [“Multi-Positioning Strategy in a Semi-Peripheral Legal Field: Homo Academicus on the Market”]. In Polska jako peryferie [Poland as Periphery]. 221–240. Edited by Tomasz Zarycki. Warszawa: Scholar.
Google Scholar

Economides, Kim. 2012. “Centre-Periphery Tensions in Legal Theory and Practice: Can Law and Lawyers Resist Urban Imperialism?” International Journal of Rural Law and Policy 2: 1–8.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.5130/ijrlp.i2.2012.3126

Eurobarometer. 2017. Special Eurobarometer 467. Wave EB88.1 TNS opinion & social. “Future of Europe.” Accessed: February 12, 2021. https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/ResultDoc/download/DocumentKy/80645
Google Scholar

Evas, Tatjana. 2014. “Estonia.” In Viking, Laval and Beyond. 139–154. Edited by Mark Friedland and Jeremias Prassl. Oxford-Portland: Hart.
Google Scholar

Flores, Andrea, Kevin Escudero and Edelina Burciaga. 2019. “Legal-Spatial Consciousness: A Legal Geography Framework for Examining Migrant Illegality.” Law & Policy 41(1): 12–33.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12120

Habermas, Jürgen. 1996. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Translated by William Rehg. Cambridge and Malden: Polity Press.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1564.001.0001

Hendrickx, Frank. 2011. “Beyond Viking and Laval: The Evolving European Context.” Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal 32(4): 1055–1078.
Google Scholar

Hinarejos, Alicia. 2008. “Laval and Viking: The Right to Collective Action Versus EU Fundamental Freedoms.” Human Rights Law Review 8: 714–729.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngn030

Jones, Reece, Ed. 2019. Open Borders. Athens, GA: Georgia University Press.
Google Scholar

Kennedy, Duncan. 1976. “Form and Substance in Private Law Adjudication.” Harvard Law Review 89: 1685–1778.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1340104

Kennedy, Duncan. 1997. A Critique of Adjudication {fin de siècle}. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar

Kennedy, Duncan. 2008. “A Left/Phenomenological Critique of the Hart/Kelsen Theory of Legal Interpretation.” In Duncan Kennedy, Legal Reasoning: Collected Essays. 153–173. Aurora: Davies Group.
Google Scholar

Kennedy, Duncan. 2015. “The Hermeneutic of Suspicion in Contemporary American Legal Thought.” Law and Critique 25(2): 91–139.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10978-014-9136-6

Kukovec, Damjan. 2014. “Hierarchies as Law.” Columbia Journal of European Law 21(1): 131–193.
Google Scholar

Kukovec, Damjan. 2015a. “Taking Change Seriously: The Rhetoric of Justice and the Reproduction of the Status Quo.” In Europe’s Justice Deficit? 391–336. Edited by Dimitry Kochenov, Grainne de Burca and Andrew Williams. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Google Scholar

Kukovec, Damjan. 2015b. “Law and the Periphery.” European Law Journal 21(3): 406–428.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12113

Lulle, Aija and Elza Ungure. 2019. “Latvia: Post-Soviet Legacy and the Impact of Neoliberal Ideology on Collective Bargaining.” In Collective Bargaining in Europe: Towards an Endgame, vol. 2. 361–380. Edited by Torsten Müller, Kurt Vandaele and Jeremy Waddington. Brussels: European Trade Union Institute (ETUI).
Google Scholar

Malmberg, Jonas. 2010. The Impact of the ECJ Judgments on Viking, Laval, Rüffert and Luxembourg on the Practice of Collective Bargaining and the Effectiveness of Social Action. European Parliament Policy Department A study. PE 440.275. Brussels: European Parliament.
Google Scholar

Mańko, Rafał. 2018a. W stronę krytycznej filozofii orzekania. Polityczność, etyka, legitymizacja [Towards a Critical Philosophy of Adjudication: The Political, Ethics, Legitimacy]. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.
Google Scholar

Mańko, Rafał. 2018b. “Orzekanie w polu polityczności” [“Adjudication in the Field of the Political”]. Filozofia Publiczna i Edukacja Demokratyczna 7(1): 65–95.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/fped.2018.7.1.4

Mańko, Rafał. 2019. “Delimiting Central Europe as a Juridical Space: A Preliminary Exercise in Critical Legal Geography.” Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Iuridica 89: 63–80.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6069.89.05

Mańko, Rafał. 2020a. “The Political as an Analytical Category in the Critical Study of Case-Law (Example of the ECJ).” Krytyka Prawa. Niezależne Studia Nad Prawem 12(3): 90–108.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.7206/kp.2080-1084.397

Mańko, Rafał. 2020b. “Dimensions of the Political in Adjudication: A Case Study.” Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Iuridica 90: 5–16.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6069.92.01

Mańko, Rafał, Martin Škop and Markéta Štěpáníková. 2016. “Carving out Central Europe as a Space of Legal Culture: A Way out of Peripherality?” Wroclaw Review of Law, Administration and Economics 6(2): 3–28.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/wrlae-2018-0002

Pylypenko, Ihor. 2014. “The Core-Periphery Relations and Connections in Social Geography: Historiography, Concepts, Theories.” Słupskie Prace Geograficzne 11: 169–176.
Google Scholar

Reich, Norbert. 2008. “Free Movement v Social Rights in an Enlarged Union – the Laval and Viking Cases Before the ECJ.” German Law Journal 9(2): 125–161.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200006350

Wallerstein, Immanuel. 2004. World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction. Durham: Duke University Press.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822399018

Warczok, Tomasz. 2016. “Globalne pole nauk społecznych a socjologia polska. Zarys centro-peryferyjnego przepływu idei” [“The Global Field of Social Sciences and Polish Sociology:
Google Scholar

Outline of Core-Periphery Transfer of Ideas”]. In Polska jako peryferie [Poland as Periphery]. 170–186. Edited by Tomasz Zarycki. Warszawa: Scholar.
Google Scholar

Warneck, Wiebke. 2010a. “What Is the Political Temperature After the Laval and Viking Judgments?” Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research 16(4): 563–565.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258910385632

Warneck, Wiebke. 2010b. “The ECJ Decisions.” In Viking – Laval – Rüffert: Consequences and Policy Perspectives. 7–12. Edited by Andreas Bücker and Wiebke Warneck. Brussels: ETUI Report 111.
Google Scholar

Westra, Richard, Dennis Badeen and Robert Albritton, Eds. 2015. The Future of Capitalism After the Financial Crisis: The Varieties of Capitalism Debate in the Age of Austerity. Abingdon: Routledge.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315858043

Zarycki, Tomasz, Ed. 2016. Polska jako peryferie [Poland as Periphery]. Warszawa: Scholar.
Google Scholar

Dziubak. European Court of Justice judgment of 3 October 2019. Case C-260/18. Kamil and Justyna Dziubakowie v Raiffeisen Bank International AG. ECLI:EU:C:2019:819.
Google Scholar

Laval. European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) judgment of 18 December 2007. Case C-341/05. Laval un Partneri Ltd v Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundet, Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundets avd. 1, Byggettan, and Svenska Elektrikerförbundet. ECLI:EU:C:2007:809.
Google Scholar

Viking. European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) judgment of 11 December 2007. Case C-438/05. International Transport Workers’ Federation and Finnish Seamen’s Union v Viking Line ABP and OÜ Viking Line Eesti. ECLI:EU:C:2007:772.
Google Scholar

Downloads

Published

2021-03-30

How to Cite

Mańko, R. (2021). The Centre–Periphery Antagonism in Adjudication: A Case Study on the Spatial Dimension of the Political. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Iuridica, 94, 121–140. https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6069.94.07