Judgment no. 269/2017 and dual preliminarity in the evolution of the jurisprudence of the Italian constitutional court GIORGIO REPETTO TABLE OF CONTENTS1. Judgment No. 269/2017: the reasons and the direction of a turning point 2. The patterns of the case law of the ItCC after 2017: settlement, enlargement, loyalty 3. Open issues I: how free is the concurrence between judicial remedies? 4. Open issues II: contextual preliminarity? 5. Open issues III: dual preliminarity beyond the Charter? 6. The internal point of view: centralized constitutional review vs. interpenetration of national and European legality Download this article in PDF format Download IJPL Vol.15 - 1 Read more articles Previous PostThe «dual preliminarity» doctrine in the case law of ordinary courts of first instance and appeals Next PostDual preliminarity, today. Evaluating the impact of judgment no. 269/2017 of the Italian Constitutional Court You Might Also Like THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND HUMAN RIGHTS, DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE SPECIAL ISSUE January 7, 2026 THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: AN OVERVIEW January 7, 2026 THE DIFFICULT ROAD TO THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION. DILEMMAS AND STRENGTHS IN THE REGULATION OF AI BY THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE January 7, 2026
THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND HUMAN RIGHTS, DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE SPECIAL ISSUE January 7, 2026
THE DIFFICULT ROAD TO THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION. DILEMMAS AND STRENGTHS IN THE REGULATION OF AI BY THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE January 7, 2026