Abstract

“Empirical evidence pertaining to the phenomenon of intra-EU labour mobility has assumed an increasingly prominent role within the framework of European Union governance. This has been notably evidenced by the implementation of initiatives directed towards the enhancement of knowledge pertaining to the posting of workers, the coordination of road transport, and the coordination of social security. While impact assessments are commonly understood as a key instrument for integrating such data into EU policymaking, their role in judicial reasoning has received far less systematic attention. The present study examines the way impact assessments are employed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), with a particular focus on labour mobility litigation. The present paper is of twofold significance. Firstly, it provides a systematic analysis of CJEU case law pertaining to impact assessments. Drawing on a corpus of 40 decisions and 390 judicial paragraphs we identify recurring modes of judicial engagement with impact assessments. These range from purely procedural references to more substantive uses in proportionality review. This enables an empirical assessment of whether the Court’s engagement with impact assessments is confined to a limited number of emblematic cases or reflects a broader judicial practice. Secondly, the paper provides an in-depth analysis of litigation concerning the Road Mobility Package and the reform of the Posting of Workers Directive. By tracing judicial references back to the underlying impact assessment documents, the study examines which types of empirical evidence (quantitative projections, qualitative descriptions, stakeholder input or academic research) effectively reach the Court, and which remain invisible. The findings indicate that the transmission of empirical knowledge is selective and context-dependent, shaped by upstream evidentiary choices and litigation strategies. While transport litigation emerges as a partial outlier, impact assessments more often function as institutional reassurance than as sources of judicially operative facts. The paper concludes with a reflection on the implications of these findings for EU labour mobility governance and for researchers engaged in empirical legal research.”

Against this backdrop, this roundtable invites representatives from academia, policy making, and civil society to discuss whether and how the current changes in the landscape of digital regulation will affect European stakeholders and the EU itself.

Speaker:

Marco Rocca

French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS), DRES research unit of the University of Strasbourg.

ERC Starting Grant holder (European Birds of Passage project)

Discussant:

Franck Lecomte (TBC)

Court of Justice of the European Union