Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/149662| Title: | The supremacy of EU law vs constitutional sovereignty in Malta : a critical examination of judicial interpretation : to what extent have Maltese courts upheld constitutional supremacy in the face of EU law obligations? |
| Authors: | Seychell, Mikael (2026) |
| Keywords: | Law -- European Union countries Constitutional law -- Malta Sovereignty |
| Issue Date: | 2026 |
| Citation: | Seychell, M. (2026). The supremacy of EU law vs constitutional sovereignty in Malta: a critical examination of judicial interpretation: to what extent have Maltese courts upheld constitutional supremacy in the face of EU law obligations? (Bachelor's dissertation). |
| Abstract: | This dissertation examines the relationship between the supremacy of European Union law and the principle of constitutional sovereignty within the Maltese legal order. It analyses the extent to which Maltese courts have upheld constitutional supremacy when faced with conflicting obligations arising from EU law. The study is grounded in a doctrinal and analytical review of Maltese legislation, constitutional provisions, and key judicial decisions. The research identifies a structural tension within Malta’s legal framework, arising from the coexistence of Article 6 of the Constitution, which affirms constitutional supremacy, and the practical operation of EU law, which requires primacy over domestic norms. This tension is explored through an analysis of significant case law, particularly Vodafone Malta Ltd v Avukat Ġenerali and Felsberger v TSG Interactive Gaming Europe Ltd, which demonstrate the approach taken by our Maltese courts. The findings indicate that Maltese courts recognise the functional supremacy of EU law over ordinary legislation but remain reluctant to accept its supremacy over the Constitution. This has resulted in a dualist system marked by doctrinal inconsistency and legal uncertainty. While some judgments adopt an EU-consistent approach, others prioritise constitutional authority, thereby exposing unresolved tensions within the legal order. The dissertation concludes that the current framework lacks sufficient clarity and coherence, and that the absence of explicit constitutional recognition of EU law primacy places an increasing burden on judicial interpretation. It suggests that constitutional reform or the development of a more consistent judicial doctrine may be necessary to resolve these tensions and ensure legal certainty within Malta’s evolving constitutional landscape. |
| Description: | LL.B.(Hons)(Melit.) |
| URI: | https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/149662 |
| Appears in Collections: | Dissertations - FacLaw - 2026 |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2608LAWLAW401000017474_1_Redacted.pdf | 1.28 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in OAR@UM are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
