Resumo

CARDENES, Agustín Alejandro. Judicial review in France: restlessness on top or constructive exchange of arguments?. Cuest. Const. [online]. 2012, n.27, pp.41-71. ISSN 1405-9193.

Recent introduction of judicial review in France gave rise to two unexpected consequences. First, judicial review procedure details, added by parliament, somehow transformed and radicalized the main reform. Second, and as a consequence of the former, hostile attitude towards judicial review from one of France's supreme jurisdictions (Cassation Court) started an unprecedented dialogue between jurisdictions, dialogue which involved almost all european and french supreme jurisdictions, apart from European Court of Human Rights. This inter-jurisdictional dialogue might be an anticipation of a new modus operandi of european jurisdictions (national and regional), which could use this dialogue or argument exchange as a mean to avoid complex challenges presented by growing interaction between multi-level jurisdictions and rules. The aim of this article is to describe and analyze these two consequences.

Palavras-chave : a posteriori judicial review - France-; argument exchange.