189 KB37 KB201320252023Knez, Rajkoletnik:49številka:6/7str. 1119-1129ISSN:0353-6521COBISSID:168794371URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-3AEVXEG3slLEXPERAPodjetje in delopravna sredstvapredhodno odločanjesodiščaSodišče EUsodstvoustavna pritožbaUstavno sodiščeustavnostVertikalna in horizontalna usklajenost pristojnosti sodišč|The article analyses the judicial dialogue made possible by the horizontal and vertical interweaving of the jurisdiction of the courts, with the emphasis on former. Two so-called intermediate procedures are highlighted: the request of the courts to assess the constitutionality of general acts before the Constitutional Court and the preliminary ruling procedure before the EU Court of Justice. The focus is also on the roles of both courts in these processes. The courts' dialogue has many advantages, some being emphasised. The article also focuses on the attitude towards the courts being bypassed by the judicial dialogue. This topic is not in the foreground, but is not entirely ignored. The article also separates the latter according to the weight of the legal questions to be answered.The article analyses the judicial dialogue made possible by the horizontal and vertical interweaving of the jurisdiction of the courts, with the emphasis on former. Two so-called intermediate procedures are highlighted: the request of the courts to assess the constitutionality of general acts before the Constitutional Court and the preliminary ruling procedure before the EU Court of Justice. The focus is also on the roles of both courts in these processes. The courts' dialogue has many advantages, some being emphasised. The article also focuses on the attitude towards the courts being bypassed by the judicial dialogue. This topic is not in the foreground, but is not entirely ignored. The article also separates the latter according to the weight of the legal questions to be answeredSrž prispevka je v analizi sodniškega dialoga, ki ga omogočata horizontalna in vertikalna prepletenost pristojnosti sodišč, pri čemer je poudarjena prva. Izpostavljena sta t. i. vmesna postopka, to je zahteva sodišč za oceno ustavnosti predpisov pred Ustavnim sodiščem in postopek predhodnega odločanja pred Sodiščem EU, ter vlogi obeh sodišč pri tem. Sodniški dialog ima številne dobre značilnosti in nekatere prispevek poudari. Osredotoča se tudi na odnos do sodišč, ki jih sodni dialog izpusti ali obide. Ta sicer ni v ospredju, a ni popolnoma neupošteven. Prispevek slednje ločuje tudi glede na težo vprašanj, ki zahtevajo odgovorTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of Slovenia