Horizontal comparison of language versions as an instrument for improving legal certainty in the European Union

Krallmann, Michael (2025). Horizontal comparison of language versions as an instrument for improving legal certainty in the European Union. University of Birmingham. Ph.D.

Krallmann2025PhD_Redacted.pdf
Text - Redacted Version
Available under License All rights reserved.
Download (3MB)

Abstract

Certainty is fundamental to the mutual rights and obligations which arise in any relationship between a governing entity and its subjects. This thesis examines certainty in the context of the multilingual system of European Union (EU) law and its impact on individual EU citizens. It considers whether the multilingual EU legal regime allows EU citizens to know their rights and obligations fully, and thus to act in accordance with a correct understanding of these rights and obligations, given the existence of differences or divergences between the published language versions of EU legal texts. The thesis adopts an inter-disciplinary approach which draws on literature and theory from the fields of law and translation studies. Ultimately, the thesis proposes that so-called horizontal comparison of language versions could help prevent divergences during the production of multilingual EU legislation, and thereby improve legal certainty for EU citizens.

The seven chapters of the thesis describe and analyse the position of individual EU citizens under the multilingual EU legal regime. Chapter II discusses the theoretical framework for the thesis and the adopted methodology, while Chapter III considers how EU legal multilingualism works in practice, discussing EU language policy and how EU law is made. The chapter notes that EU legislation is published in the Union’s 24 official languages, that the stated reasons for doing so include the objective of making EU law accessible to EU citizens, that the production of language versions entails extensive translation activity, that the language versions have equal legal status and that EU citizens are told that they may rely on any language version they wish. Following consideration of the legal framework for relations between the EU and its citizens in Chapter IV, including both the question of the EU’s status in law and key principles which EU law seeks to uphold, Chapter V examines how different language versions of EU legal texts come into being, and points out that divergences may not be caught by existing translation quality assessment methods. As a result – and despite assertions to the contrary – persons who rely on a given language version of an EU legislative act face the risk that they may obtain an incomplete, non-final and unreliable account of their rights and obligations. Ultimately, this may result in civil and/or criminal liability, a state of affairs which raises substantial rule of law concerns. Chapter VI of the thesis considers practical steps taken to minimise and eliminate divergences between language versions, including not least through interpretation by the European Court of Justice in the form of preliminary rulings. Chapter VII examines theoretical approaches proposed to address divergences between texts and ends with the a presentation of a proposed new approach, while Chapter VIII sums up the content of the thesis.

This thesis makes several contributions to existing literature. First, it employs a novel theoretical framework for examining the impact of divergences between language versions on individual EU citizens, in the form a functionalist approach which views the multilingual EU legal regime as a system serving specific purposes, where the achievement of such purposes can be evaluated by reference to resulting outcomes. Second, the thesis draws on both translation-related and legal literature to present a novel, integrated overview of the causes, outcomes and potential for alleviating the impact of divergences between language versions of EU legal texts. This contribution is bolstered by the empirical part of the thesis, which – in the form of interview data – adds to current knowledge through insights into the production processes of EU legal texts which are normally invisible to readers of such texts. Third, the thesis adds to current knowledge on the topic of social contract theory and its applicability to relations between the EU and its citizens, challenging the prevailing view that the EU is not a state and that social contract theory is thus irrelevant. Fourth, perhaps the most significant contribution of the thesis to current literature relates to the topic of legal certainty, highlighting two conflicting positions on legal certainty in the EU, respectively termed the systemic and individual views, but ultimately concluding that divergences between language versions undermine legal certainty under both views. Fifth, the thesis contributes to current knowledge in the translation studies field by proposing a classification of approaches to translation quality assessment by reference to the number of informational sources on which they draw. Finally, the thesis presents a novel approach, referred to as horizontal comparison, as a tool for addressing the problematic phenomenon of divergences between EU legal texts and thereby improving legal certainty for EU citizens.

Type of Work:

Thesis (Doctorates > Ph.D.)

Award Type:

Doctorates > Ph.D.

Supervisor(s):