A note of caution on CJEU databases

The purpose of this short research note is to draw attention to two major pitfalls of working with databases of decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The first one is technical in nature and relates to the discrepant coverage of the Curia and Eur-Lex databases. The second one is l...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Michal Ovádek
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Cambridge University Press 2024-06-01
Series:European Law Open
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2752613524000171/type/journal_article
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1846132965159993344
author Michal Ovádek
author_facet Michal Ovádek
author_sort Michal Ovádek
collection DOAJ
description The purpose of this short research note is to draw attention to two major pitfalls of working with databases of decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The first one is technical in nature and relates to the discrepant coverage of the Curia and Eur-Lex databases. The second one is linguistic in nature and relates to the fact that most scholars using these databases work in English. New work on this front is capable of addressing the first issue but a change to research practices would be required to address the second.
format Article
id doaj-art-fed66fc07fc541b88c5599cd85763b3c
institution Kabale University
issn 2752-6135
language English
publishDate 2024-06-01
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format Article
series European Law Open
spelling doaj-art-fed66fc07fc541b88c5599cd85763b3c2024-12-09T14:21:14ZengCambridge University PressEuropean Law Open2752-61352024-06-01335335910.1017/elo.2024.17A note of caution on CJEU databasesMichal Ovádek0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2552-2580Department of Political Science, University College London, London, UKThe purpose of this short research note is to draw attention to two major pitfalls of working with databases of decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The first one is technical in nature and relates to the discrepant coverage of the Curia and Eur-Lex databases. The second one is linguistic in nature and relates to the fact that most scholars using these databases work in English. New work on this front is capable of addressing the first issue but a change to research practices would be required to address the second.https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2752613524000171/type/journal_articleEuropean Court of Justicedatabasecase lawEU lawtext-as-data
spellingShingle Michal Ovádek
A note of caution on CJEU databases
European Law Open
European Court of Justice
database
case law
EU law
text-as-data
title A note of caution on CJEU databases
title_full A note of caution on CJEU databases
title_fullStr A note of caution on CJEU databases
title_full_unstemmed A note of caution on CJEU databases
title_short A note of caution on CJEU databases
title_sort note of caution on cjeu databases
topic European Court of Justice
database
case law
EU law
text-as-data
url https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2752613524000171/type/journal_article
work_keys_str_mv AT michalovadek anoteofcautiononcjeudatabases
AT michalovadek noteofcautiononcjeudatabases